Many in our country take the police to be rudderless, and many are seared by their experiences with the agency. The police’s reputation is that of a sordid agency, with an inimical and grating rank and file, and largely insouciant officers. The police have become lackluster and is widely seen as a tool in the hands of the influential elite. What is left of it has been damaged by the surfeit of corruption and a lack of discipline. The absence of consistent quality training are also major causes of its tottering and hollow condition.
The police need a whole new program for resurrection to remain reliable in its major purpose of crime prevention and the maintenance of law and order. As an entity responsible for the prevention of crime, it has two major functions, one is preventing crime from being committed and the second is taking action against criminals. In my view, the police’s subpar role in investigating crime that has been committed is the major cause of its deterioration. This role of police is also a major cause of political interference and hence, requires reforms.
The dependence on local political and landed elites, and corruption are major causes that have eroded its functional capabilities. Our country’s rural areas are very much traditional and parochial, hence interpersonal enmities in the system are commonplace. It is no surprise then that political influence and the intervention of patronage networks are major causes of interference in police work.
Groupings based around loyalty networks are the key hallmarks of our traditional society. In such societies, honor is accorded great significance.
It is in these circumstances that the arrest of an individual is a tool in the hands of police and influential elites, who use it to get their desired, ill-motivated results and bring dishonor on those they have all manner of grievances with.
Hence, in my view, if we reform the police’s power to arrest an individual, the significance of getting arrested will lose the fear associated with it. The law needs to be reformed to limit the power of arrest, except by prior permission of the duty magistrate or higher authority, as is done in non-indictable crimes. Limited grounds for arrest by police of their own accord should be maintained, as in heinous crimes where sanctions include capital punishment or life imprisonment.
Courts should also take notice of the usurpation of liberty of a person. In this way, a major cause of interference and bribery may be sorted. This curb in the powers to arrest of the police will also reduce the stakes involved in the registration of First Information Reports – the dreaded FIRs, which are a major cause of interference in police work.
Arrest should be reduced to very limited conditions and circumstances. In jurisprudential significance, arrest is needed for investigation purposes before the commencement of trial.
With the advent of technological advancements, there is a need to devise modern ways to conduct investigations and collect evidence without arrest. The power to arrest should only be exercised when the person concerned is not cooperating with the police in the course of investigation.
There is no purpose to arrest when an investigation can be conducted without keeping the person in custody. It should therefore, be used scarcely; a person should only be arrested after the accusation against them has been proven in the court of law.
Though there may be a few exceptions, but judges should have the authority to authorize arrests. As crimes that require instant arrest are concerned, the person should be immediately produced before the court, and it should be for the court to determine whether they should remain arrested or freed. Even in these situations, the metric should not be whether the person of concern should be freed or not, rather it ought to be determining what the arrest achieves.
This reformation in the power to arrest will change the current inefficiencies that plague the police, and will pave the path to a transformation into a professional police force, whose primary focus will be the prevention of crime.
In that regard, significant reforms should be made to enhance the investigation capabilities of the police, so that reported cases can get their due attention. Investigators should be offered quality training, and should be well versed with collecting evidence that can be produced in court.
The decision to prosecute should also lie with magistrates or concerned courts. The police’s role should be to present evidence before the court, and it is for the court to determine whether the evidence presented is sufficient to commence the trial. This will also reduce corruption and interference at the investigation stage.
The power of arrest and the determination of guilt by the police are major causes of corruption in our policing systems. Albeit there are numerous other causes of corruption and police dysfunction, but starting with these two rather benign reforms will kickstart paradigm shifts in the function of the police. The power to arrest of other law enforcement authorities should also be revised, to prevent authorities from indulging in misuse and politically motivated actions.
In Pakistan, we often see that these powers are deployed as a tool to defame and to bring dishonor in the case of interpersonal disputes and grievances. Innocent people often remain in custody for long periods, even when the courts have not been able to determine if they were involved in criminal activities.
Civilized societies accord a great deal of significance to the liberty of their citizens. We need to reform our laws, institutions and systems, so that we can also ensure liberty to our people, and the right to be dealt in accordance with the law in a fair and open manner.
The whole process - from the registration of the FIR, till the conclusion of the trial - needs to be looked at, and procedural changes must be made to make it more efficient. The aim of these reforms ought to ensure that our policing is a guarantor of our citizens’ liberty and human rights, and not a usurper. Changes in the whole nexus of our criminal justice system, which is based on the arrest of the accused, are past overdue.
The police need a whole new program for resurrection to remain reliable in its major purpose of crime prevention and the maintenance of law and order. As an entity responsible for the prevention of crime, it has two major functions, one is preventing crime from being committed and the second is taking action against criminals. In my view, the police’s subpar role in investigating crime that has been committed is the major cause of its deterioration. This role of police is also a major cause of political interference and hence, requires reforms.
The dependence on local political and landed elites, and corruption are major causes that have eroded its functional capabilities. Our country’s rural areas are very much traditional and parochial, hence interpersonal enmities in the system are commonplace. It is no surprise then that political influence and the intervention of patronage networks are major causes of interference in police work.
Groupings based around loyalty networks are the key hallmarks of our traditional society. In such societies, honor is accorded great significance.
Arrest should be reduced to very limited conditions and circumstances.
It is in these circumstances that the arrest of an individual is a tool in the hands of police and influential elites, who use it to get their desired, ill-motivated results and bring dishonor on those they have all manner of grievances with.
Hence, in my view, if we reform the police’s power to arrest an individual, the significance of getting arrested will lose the fear associated with it. The law needs to be reformed to limit the power of arrest, except by prior permission of the duty magistrate or higher authority, as is done in non-indictable crimes. Limited grounds for arrest by police of their own accord should be maintained, as in heinous crimes where sanctions include capital punishment or life imprisonment.
Courts should also take notice of the usurpation of liberty of a person. In this way, a major cause of interference and bribery may be sorted. This curb in the powers to arrest of the police will also reduce the stakes involved in the registration of First Information Reports – the dreaded FIRs, which are a major cause of interference in police work.
Arrest should be reduced to very limited conditions and circumstances. In jurisprudential significance, arrest is needed for investigation purposes before the commencement of trial.
With the advent of technological advancements, there is a need to devise modern ways to conduct investigations and collect evidence without arrest. The power to arrest should only be exercised when the person concerned is not cooperating with the police in the course of investigation.
This reformation in the power to arrest will change the current inefficiencies that plague the police, and will pave the path to a transformation into a professional police force, whose primary focus will be the prevention of crime.
There is no purpose to arrest when an investigation can be conducted without keeping the person in custody. It should therefore, be used scarcely; a person should only be arrested after the accusation against them has been proven in the court of law.
Though there may be a few exceptions, but judges should have the authority to authorize arrests. As crimes that require instant arrest are concerned, the person should be immediately produced before the court, and it should be for the court to determine whether they should remain arrested or freed. Even in these situations, the metric should not be whether the person of concern should be freed or not, rather it ought to be determining what the arrest achieves.
This reformation in the power to arrest will change the current inefficiencies that plague the police, and will pave the path to a transformation into a professional police force, whose primary focus will be the prevention of crime.
In that regard, significant reforms should be made to enhance the investigation capabilities of the police, so that reported cases can get their due attention. Investigators should be offered quality training, and should be well versed with collecting evidence that can be produced in court.
The decision to prosecute should also lie with magistrates or concerned courts. The police’s role should be to present evidence before the court, and it is for the court to determine whether the evidence presented is sufficient to commence the trial. This will also reduce corruption and interference at the investigation stage.
Civilized societies accord a great deal of significance to the liberty of their citizens. We need to reform our laws, institutions and systems, so that we can also ensure liberty to our people, and the right to be dealt in accordance with the law in a fair and open manner.
The power of arrest and the determination of guilt by the police are major causes of corruption in our policing systems. Albeit there are numerous other causes of corruption and police dysfunction, but starting with these two rather benign reforms will kickstart paradigm shifts in the function of the police. The power to arrest of other law enforcement authorities should also be revised, to prevent authorities from indulging in misuse and politically motivated actions.
In Pakistan, we often see that these powers are deployed as a tool to defame and to bring dishonor in the case of interpersonal disputes and grievances. Innocent people often remain in custody for long periods, even when the courts have not been able to determine if they were involved in criminal activities.
Civilized societies accord a great deal of significance to the liberty of their citizens. We need to reform our laws, institutions and systems, so that we can also ensure liberty to our people, and the right to be dealt in accordance with the law in a fair and open manner.
The whole process - from the registration of the FIR, till the conclusion of the trial - needs to be looked at, and procedural changes must be made to make it more efficient. The aim of these reforms ought to ensure that our policing is a guarantor of our citizens’ liberty and human rights, and not a usurper. Changes in the whole nexus of our criminal justice system, which is based on the arrest of the accused, are past overdue.