The job of the judiciary is to adjudicate on matters, not to frame policy or implement them, both being the jobs of the executive. Lately, however, this seems to be changing. For instance, today, more often than not, the Union Government is seen to be acting not on its own, but at the prodding of the Supreme Court in several matters of policy and implementation. It is safe to suspect that successive central governments have been doing a perfect job of governance by using the Courts as a shield. So with the issue of police reforms.
A decision by the Supreme Court Tuesday to substantively remove power from states to decide exclusively on appointments of Director General of Police (DGP) or state police chiefs is a ruling certain to raise eyebrows. Police reforms do not or should not commence from the top. The problems arise at the ground level. It is the common citizen who has to bear the brunt of a police force turned brutish. The Indian police force was given birth to by foreign rulers, not by Indians. The idea at the time of inception was to suppress and subjugate a race, not bring in peace and positive order for ushering in prosperity.
Also Read
The basic signs of any civilised society are visible through two primary aspects, namely, a functioning law and order machinery and a fearless judicial system. Both these should be complementary, not adversaries.
This judgement of the SC, whether intended for an acting or full-time DGP, stipulates that the Union Public Service Commission shall send to the concerned state government a list of 3 senior Indian Police Service (IPS) officers of that concerned state. The state government shall be bound to nominate one of those persons mentioned in the list sent by the UPSC to the post of DG Police.
Questions may arise about the impartiality of the list created by the UPSC. On what basis will the Central government commission decide and create that list? Will the UPSC go solely by the past notings in the character role certificates of some officers? If that be so, a great amount of confusion will be generated. It will not remain solely as an issue that will be seen as breaking down the foundations of federalism. The more important question could be that a police officer might have been a very subservient, spineless aide to seniors and managed excellent service notings but could fail miserably when expected to lead a force in times of trouble.
The policing in India through the past seven decades of Independence is largely on the lines put in place by the Foreign rulers to serve their (colonial) interests. Those rulers wanted to suppress the people and they used brutal methods to achieve their ends. Times have changed. Today, crime investigation is done in the developed world in largely scientific terms, the brutality that underpinned police styles have largely vanished, and human rights are getting due regard in investigations. However, the reports that come from most states about police brutality do not indicate the Indian police have changed for the better in any respect in recent decades.
Added to this, new fronts are opening up for them to tackle — like militancy and terrorism and security of powerful individuals. Under the circumstances, a wholesale reform in the police force is a matter of urgency. But, government after government is neither willing to effect changes in policing methods nor ready to heed to any sane external opinions.
The morale of the police force is down also for the reason that there allegedly is large-scale interference from the ruling class at Centre and in states, over and above the controls exercised in normal course by bureaucrats.
It is doubtful whether the present court directive will in any way help change the scenario for the better. On the face of it, it could mean the Centre would exercise its authority via the UPSC, it being an entity run by the Union Government. This could be interpreted to mean that the state’s powers are being curtailed, and that the Centre would call the shots in matters of policing in states – a scenario similar to what’s happening in Delhi where the state chief minister is at the receiving end of such a practice. IPS officers, anyway, are of the central cadre.
What is clear, as of now, is that the UPSC does not have a mechanism to do the new job assigned to it by the apex court. Question arises as to how the relative merit of an IPS officer or officers would be judged by a panel sitting in Delhi. Officers’ action is in states far and wide, and hence the state governments would certainly be better equipped to make a judgment.
More important, however, is the issue of wholesale police reforms. The present NDA government headed by Prime Minister Narendra Damodardas Modi has carried forward with the old systems — many of them antiquated beyond use — that previous governments have left behind. There is the lack of a refreshing feel even after this government completed four out of its five-year term.
