VICTIM: Former DGP Amod Kanth sacked
for refusing to succumb to political pressure. |
The unceremonious sacking of the
Director General of Police, Goa, Amod Kanth by the
Chief Minister, just on the eve of the International
Film Festival of India, highlights the blatant
interference by politicians into the functioning of
the police force. In this context GOAN OBSERVER brings
you an insight by K P S Gill, former DGP, Punjab, into
how political vengefulness is ruining the Police
Force. |
THE
DRAMA surrounding the arrest of a number of senior DMK
leaders, including former Tamil Nadu Chief Minister M.
Karunanidhi, demonstrated the power and impact of
televised imagery on public perceptions and left behind
many disturbing questions: regarding the circumstances and
manner of the arrests; the obvious political posturing for
the television cameras; and the conflicting images that
were alternately projected by rival television channels
aligned to the political parties in conflict. Many
questions relating to the case have been debated in the
media since, but one that is among the most unsettling for
men in uniform is the issue of the ‘politicization’ of the
police and the exploitation of the Force, or of some of
its officers, for partisan political or personal ends.
The startling imagery of the
widely televised arrests, the subsequent protests and
police responses in Tamil Nadu, and recurrent reports of
‘political interference’ in police functioning in other
parts of the country, however, project reductionist images
that are far from an accurate representation of the
reality of police functioning. It would be absurd, of
course, to deny that politics is often the cause of many
unjustifiable police actions. What is forgotten, however,
is that nine-tenths of police activity is ‘invisible’, and
we notice only those incidents and cases where something
manifestly wrong occurs. Our entire perception is then
colored by these few, aberrant actions.
There are, in fact, thousands
of cases every single day and across the country, where
police officers at every level resist unwarranted
pressures from a wide range of sources, even as there are
many cases where they succumb or, more significantly,
enter into collusive and mutually ‘enriching’ arrangements
with compromised and partisan elements. The reality is far
more complex than the simple stereotypes in the public
mind.
PAYING A PRICE
Those who stand by their
principles often have to pay a price that can hardly be
imagined. I know of one instance in which a young IPS
officer recently sought my intercession. His case
illustrates the sheer insecurity and danger that can
confront an officer who does his duty at extraordinary
personal risk, and against the capricious demands of the
politically powerful. This officer had pitted himself
against a group of organized criminals who enjoyed
political support at the highest level in the State. He
was pressurized on several occasions, but continued to do
what the law required him to, with the result that he and
his family received a multiplicity of death threats, and
had to live under constant armed guard. Suddenly, however,
he found that he had been relieved of his charge, and was
not assigned any other charge for an extended period of
time. His personal and his family’s armed guards were also
withdrawn and, with mounting threats from the criminals,
he had left his cadre State and was running from pillar to
post to ensure that at least his family received the
minimal security that could assure their survival. He had
failed to receive any relief from the senior officers of
his own cadre or from any other institutional body.
This is not an exceptional
case, though political vindictiveness does not often go
this far. Almost every upright officer in the Police Force
would, however, be able to relate at least a handful of
personal horror stories of political vengefulness. It
bears repetition, however, that despite these enormous
risks, a very large number of officers refuse to follow
politically colored directives and improper orders, and
they are invariably made to pay a high price for their
principles.
COLLUDING WITH THE CORRUPT
The greatest danger to the
discipline and integrity of the Force, however, does not
come from those who succumb to manifest pressures, but
from those who willingly collude with the corrupt. Once
again, such collusion can go to startling extents. I am,
for instance, aware of an Inspector General of Prisons in
Punjab who had written to all IG Prisons in the country
where convicted terrorists from Punjab were incarcerated,
informing them that the prisons in Punjab were empty, and
that terrorists serving sentences in these various jails
could be sent back to Punjab. Some of these terrorists,
after being sent back, then sought and secured parole with
substantial political support, and were released. The
levels of collusion and corruption are, thus, simply
incredible.
All political interference in
police functions, however, is not illegitimate. In some
case, especially where mass agitations by political
parties, labour groups or other collectivities and
associations of citizens are involved, it is not
sufficient to go by the letter of the law. The political
ramifications of any action are to be assessed, and the
political executive is often best equipped to make some of
the critical decisions in this context. In the case of
involving the investigation and prosecution of crime,
however, the investigating agency must be completely
autonomous, and is theoretically intended to act without
interference from any other agency. It is here,
unfortunately, that interference, both by the political
executive and by the courts, is becoming more and more
frequent and corrosive in its impact on the institutional
integrity of the Force.
overpowering
INTERFERENCE
There are a number of areas
in which such political interference has become
overwhelming. The most significant among these is a range
of organized criminal activities. In the border areas of
Punjab, thus, one hears openly of smugglers affiliated to
particular political parties. Political connections are
most important to secure a degree of immunity from arrest.
On the other hand, the police often make unwarranted
arrests to project a false image of executive efficiency.
In the early 1980s, when terrorism was just emerging in
Punjab, a number of railway stations, government buildings
and records were set on fire. The Police made over a
hundred arrests of the alleged ‘miscreants’ – all of who
were subsequently found to be poor migrant workers
entirely unconnected with the crimes. Similarly, arrests
are often made as a panic response after incidents that
have the potential to bring the political leadership into
disrepute. In Assam, there was a case that occurred
immediately after the Emergency of 1975-77 was lifted. A
short circuit caused a fire and the destruction of a large
volume of records in the Assam Secretariat. A Chowkidar
was immediately arrested for this act of ‘sabotage’
because it was believed that the incumbent government
might be accused of trying to destroy the records relating
to alleged ‘Emergency excesses’. I ordered an
investigation, which made it clear that no mischief was
involved, and, fortunately, the Chowkidar was freed after
only a few hours of detention. Not everyone is quite as
lucky.
In many States, political
interference has reached a level where postings even at
the rank of SHOs are made, not by senior police officers,
but by politicians. The result has been the unprecedented
erosion of the authority of the police hierarchy. I know
of one case in which an SHO offered to have his SP’s
unwanted transfer cancelled.
Honest officers in many of
the poorly administered States in the country now simply
leave the State and spend extended tenures on deputations
with Central organizations. The result is that only the
worst of officers are willing or eager to remain in the
worst run States. The folly of excessive political
interference is, however, dawning on the political
leadership at least of some of the better governed States,
and the value of an honest and efficient Police officer is
now increasingly, albeit often grudgingly, conceded.
Courtesy:
Hindustan Times.