Thursday, September 16, 2010
Thoughts on police reforms
Ikram Sehgal
None of the reforms suggested by eminent retired police officers, without exception all belonging to the Police Service of Pakistan (PSP), addresses their despicable treatment of the overwhelming majority (92 per cent) of Provincial Police Officers (PPOs). Without any shadow of a doubt, that is the root cause of the police system’s failure to perform in accordance with its capacity and potential. This recurring failure over the years to rectify this blatant discrimination has destroyed the effectiveness of our law enforcement machinery as it once was, and should be in the present and for the future.
The Police Order of 2002 increased senior police posts almost by 300 per cent. More than 15 per cent of the police budget funds police administrators in the form of a long chain of supervisors above the DSP (and SHO) level-i.e. ASP, SP, SSP, DIG, Additional IG and IG. By putting in place a similar rank-structure as the armed forces, the police hierarchy is trying to run a community service along military lines. These ranks do not exist in crime-free societies. No organisation, not even in the private sector, can afford or perform efficiently with multiple layers of supervisors. Their output can be gauged from the adverse reports appearing in the media on a daily basis.
All developed countries have a local “community-based” model of policing. Under the law, the interface of the police with the state ends at the level of the police station, because the final report of the investigation of any registered case is submitted to court by the officer in charge of a police station. The investigating officer has an authority delegated by the magistrate to collect evidence for the ascertainment of facts and present it before the magistrate for further action. With the additional chain of supervisers in a society heavily dependant upon client-patron relationships, the moment a complaint gets filed, rival parties approach their respective contacts in the police hierarchy to try and influence the enquiry, and the investigating officer starts getting conflicting instructions from his many bosses. Or, as one SHO in Karachi’s elite DHA/Clifton area put it, “Previously I had to look after the SP, now I have to ensure water tankers are delivered to six houses, the ASP’s, SP’s, SSP’s, DIG’s, AIG’s and the IG’s.”
When the British created the Imperial Police Service to control the provinces and the communities, they did so in a manner that best served their colonial interests and accommodated the white man at top jobs. The policing arrangements under the Police Act, 1861, passed by the Central Legislature was kept quite simple and flexible, leaving the option to the provinces to adopt it as a provincial law and improve upon it according to local cultures and conditions.
Consequently, three different models of the police organisation-the Commissionerate, the Directorate and the Inspectorate-came into being in South Asia. The worst one of them, the “Inspectorate,” was based on the Irish Constabulary. It was designed to be militaristic, the prime aim being to crush people. Unfortunately, this was adopted in Pakistan with the creation of One Unit. Previously, it had been applicable only to Punjab Police, Sindh and Balochistan being regulated under the Bombay Police Act.
The Police Order 2002 focused on the perks and promotion of senior ranks, rather than on the reform of the police organisation to enable it to become more approachable by citizens. The focal point of the service, the police station, has been ignored in terms of resources and professional staff, with the consequent deterioration in the quality of leadership.
PSP officers control all promotions and postings with an overwhelming bias against the PPOs. Notwithstanding their performance of the most hazardous duties, the PPOs have virtually no prospects of promotion. A graphic illustration of the frustration is disciplinary punishments within the police department. Up to 28 per cent of the personnel receive punishments every year. In three years all members of the department’s staff have been punished in one way or another. Incidentally, not a single superviser, a PSP officer has received punishment in any form.
With all avenues of vertical promotions capped by the Establishment Division, PPOs and other departmental ranks have become completely frustrated, and therefore do not put their heart and soul into public service. The police being exclusively a provincial subject in the constitution, how is the Establishment Division able to make rules and carry out promotions for provincial police departments?
The general perception prevailing among provincial ranks is that performance of duty, the sacrifices entailed and punishments are meant for the PPOs while the luxuries and comforts of bungalows and cars are for those who really have no stake in the system. Even if allegations of corrupt practices are proven against any PSP officer, the officer is posted to another province or some federal agency, rather than be subjected to disciplinary action.
In the Sialkot incident of Aug 15, the DPO stated openly in court before the chief justice that since he is a PSP officer no one can do anything to him. Punjab Chief Minister Shehbaz Sharif had to beg Prime Minister Yusuf Raza Gilani for days for the suspension of a Grade 18 PSP officer. In such circumstances, how can the provincial government be responsible for law and order when it has no, or very limited, control over police officers?
The service-entry exam does have merit, but that does not by itself make an officer superior for his entire life. His advancement must be based on performance. The annual policing plans and police-administration reports, and the Police Gazette are important public documents that record the expenditures being made. These should be transparent and available for public consumption. In the UK the Home Office ensures publication of these important documents in newspapers and on the Internet.
Oversight by the district magistrate over the police was taken away in Police Order 2002 and replaced by the Public Safety Commissions and the Independent Police Complaint Authority. While promotions to senior ranks and expansion of the police organisation have taken place, these two entities are still non-existent. This being despite the Supreme Court’s directions for early establishment of such institutional arrangements.
Provincial Civil Service (PCS) officers are agitating for their rights in Punjab. If they go through with their threatened strike in support of their demands, the PSP will sit back and instruct the PPOs to quell their protests. Overwhelming majorities in their respective cadres, and both PCS and PPOs, are victims of injustice at the hands of a minuscule majority. In the “divide and rule” gambit they will be used against each other.
Rather than attempts to reform the laws, what is really required is a drastic reorganisation of the service structure of the police to reduce the layers of command, and bring the police under the actual control of the provincial governments.
Only a well-trained and efficient police force not being subject to influence can combat our steady slide towards anarchy. Is this possible when more than 92 per cent of the police officers remain aggrieved at the injustice being meted out to them by less than eight per cent?
The writer is a defence and political analyst. Email
isehgal@pathfinder9.com