Holding the police accountable

Disconcerting police excesses in quick succession have once again brought to the fore the much-discussed issue of police accountability. A desirable view is that control of the police should lie with society as a whole, and yet this is, in practical terms, not possible. On the other hand, police independence will itself create social or policing problems. It is right and should be made possible for members of the public to have the opportunity to have their views or concerns heard and taken into account by senior police officers deciding operational policing matters.

Individuals belonging to marginalised groups have an urgent interest in policing which is engendered by the behaviour of police towards them. If police officers treat those individuals discourteously, use violence, demand bribes or fabricate charges with impunity, then every member of society will feel unsafe when dealing with the police. The police under democratic control are under an obligation to behave with civility, honesty, and lack of physical abuse. Therefore, the expectations individuals have of their treatment by the police is crucial to effective policing.

Public confidence relies upon the existence of a mechanism for the individual to have allegations of police transgressions dealt with effectively. Furthermore, that mechanism must be perceived as efficient and effective, which requires that it be independent.

Any system of police accountability may ultimately require legislative force. Police powers and police discipline both require legislative authority. It is relevant to recollect that public confidence is gained by having some form of external investigation or review body to avoid the perception of a cover-up which arises when the police are seen to be investigating themselves.

Society as a whole is concerned with very broad issues in policing. Among these concerns are standards of behaviour, such as, police integrity, and the manner in which incidents are generally handled, including the amount of force each society finds acceptable and unacceptable in carrying out police duties. There is actually no clear defining point at which police malpractice can no longer be considered as isolated instances. It is also difficult to lend credence to traditional police response to allegations of police corruption as "a few rotten apples in the barrel".

Public confidence increases when the police complaints system provides for an external body to supervise an investigation, or review the evidence and conclusions drawn by the police investigation, especially when this body has both the power and the will to carry out an impartial review and order a re-investigation, if necessary. This is so because there is a very real public fear that complaints against police personnel will not be taken seriously. The need, quite clearly, is to ensure that the system of accountability allows society as a whole to remain in control of its police. 

In Bangladesh, where criminalisation of politics is of concern, it is very difficult to safeguard against the delinquent policemen who have necessarily nurtured a close nexus between themselves and the pliant politicians who are in power. To do away with this undesirable situation, it is essential to devise a suitable measure to keep close watch on the performance of the police and judge their performance and make it public whenever any wrongful performance is observed. 

The police are vested with the authority to use legitimate force against the citizens and this mandate to use violence to curb violence raises the key issue that the police themselves should not indulge in unnecessary violence or excessive force. 

It is time to think of creating a department of supervision to supervise the police performance also. The task before such an organ should be to ensure that the police use force and authority with restraint and only in unavoidable circumstances. In order to prevent misuse of powers, there is need for accountability. While the ultimate accountability of the police who are vested with considerable coercive powers is to the people, the police must respect the law of the land. They are not licensed to become law-breakers themselves. We must be able to believe that the most visible symbol of the government is a helping instrument for the public instead of a coercive arm of the State.        

The writer is a columnist of The Daily Star and a former IGP, Bangladesh Police.