THE necessity of carrying out the much needed police reform on a priority basis has once again been highlighted by The Daily Star editorial of October 27. The military-backed caretaker government facilitated the passing of many reform-oriented ordinances during its two-year tenure but did not initiate any substantive measures towards the police reform. That is an unwelcome reality too live with despite the manifest urgency to reform and thus to modernise our police force.
At this point of time one perhaps cannot be faulted for accusing the concerned authorities of dithering on police reform. Such a view acquires credence when one sees that after ten months of the installation of a democratically elected government there is no tangible move afoot to re-invigorate the stalled reform process. Much work, including eliciting of public opinion on the proposed new Police Ordinance, had been done in the preceding years; leading newspapers and NGOs have held workshops/seminars with a view to exchanging opinion. The matter now lies in the home ministry.
Under circumstances as above, it would be in the fitness of things to hope that the home ministry, now steered by popularly elected leaders, would take appropriate administrative and legislative measures to accord final shape to the new police ordinance. The subject may be extensively discussed in the concerned parliamentary standing committee and the parliament itself to dispel any misgivings whatsoever.
It may be worthwhile to remember that the politicisation of the police has been a serious malady. Pressures have been exerted for dropping proceedings against those with political connections and also to filing trivial charges against political enemies to harass them. Local politicians, at places, even sat in the police stations to serve as a buffer between their supporters and the police. Many felt that Bangladesh had developed a dual system of justice, one through the formal channels of the criminal justice system and another through political channels.
Political manipulation between 1991-2006 led to decline in discipline, and senior officers were often unable to control undisciplined juniors with political connections. A situation developed wherein intrusion of politics in matters of police management led to solicitation of further political influence. Pervasive disillusionment, loss of pride and collegiality was the result. As against being the professional imposition of a coherent moral consensus on society, policing largely transformed into disconcertingly partisan political activity.
The establishment has to realise and appreciate that politicisation of the police, its unaccountability to the people and its outdated managerial practices largely result from lack of professionalism and accountability within the organisation. Political misuse of the police has been the direct result of internal organisational problems and poor performance. One cannot, however, lay all the blame on the political class, ignoring the negative role of the police leadership.
For the British, the maintenance of their rule in India was the prime consideration. Crime control was only a secondary objective to be achieved through fear of the police. The Penal Code, Criminal Procedure Code and the Evidence Act put in place a legal framework and a police force equipped for the maintenance of British rule by force. The Penal Code prioritises offences against the state and the maintenance of public order. It begins consideration of traditional crime only from Section 299 onwards. The Criminal Procedure Code begins with the "arrest of persons" and the "maintenance of public order and tranquility" before getting to grips with criminal procedure relating to investigation and trial.
We have to remember that the Police Act of 1861, despite its preamble, prioritises collection and communication of intelligence affecting the public peace. The prevention and detection of crime is included among the duties of the police only in section 23 of the Act. The Act further provides for punitive policing at the cost of local residents in the event of "disturbances" and for the appointment of private persons as special police officers.
It would be relevant to remember that our political leaders have failed to introduce administrative changes in tune with the provisions of the republican Constitution of Bangladesh. The police remained distant from the people and are as disliked as before.
It is very important to note that the blanket power of superintendence vested in the government by the Police Act, 1861, is not appropriate in a democracy. Further, the role of intelligence agencies has not been redefined to protect the fundamental right to freedoms of association, expression and movement. The police in Bangladesh still keep a watch on all political activities without discrimination and exclude only the ruling party of the day, which gives them authoritarian powers antithetical to the democratic spirit.
There is no denying that in a democracy police could not be wholly autonomous and political intervention is both inevitable and necessary to some extent. Therefore, there is a need to specify areas where government interference is justified and others where it is not. The recommendation of setting up of Security Commissions/Public Safety Commission as proposed in the new police ordinance can do this job effectively as its members are likely to be non-political persons. The enactment of a new police ordinance brooks no further delay.

Muhammad Nurul Huda is a columnist for The Daily Star.