The present character of Police, in India, is of a Force under control of a Supercop who is not accountable to the people but to his/her political boss. The police uses brute physical and psychological force to intimidate, control and attack people with complete immunity to its actions and consequences thereof under the law.
This Police Force was designed by and suited the British for whom people were subjects/slaves and not free citizens.
This lumpen character of Police Force - totally unacceptable in an Independent India - was recognized by eminent jurists, cops themselves, citizens' rights groups and also a section of political class.
The history of events led to formation of various committees/commissions to suggest ways to change this scenario to make Police aware of its role of Service-to-the-People and not of Servants of Political bosses.
Once the Reforms are in place, the Cop-In-Charge can be made accountable for actions of his Dept and staff and brought to justice. In the present set-up, no one is accountable and suspension, sent-to-police-lines is all that a cop receives by way of punishment.
Since the Law-and-Order is a State Subject under the Constitution, the Union Govt cannot enforce Police Reforms. Hence, the Hon'ble Supreme Court asked States to implement Police Reforms specific to their own State.
On the face of it, it seemed natural that the States will introduce Police Reforms, but, that's the point where politicisation of the whole matter led to chaos. Politicians will have none of it, they won't let this symbol of VVIP Status go to people.
Hence, it is the political class, and not the Law, not the Courts, not the Constitution and not the Cops themselves but, the political class that is blocking the introduction and implementation of Police Reforms.
The brutalities of police cannot be dealt with effectively without the requisite reforms, the training of cops and accountability by the Supercop of the State.
Till it is done, there is no end, in sight, to Police brutalities as witness in past 18-months as exposed by visual and print media.
TV debates on sensitive matters like sensitization of cops show such crass insensitivity by panellists (and anchors of the show) who use their lung power to score brownie points.
Some anchors believe they have the last word on the topic and interrupt the wisest panellist midway through his/her viewpoint on the pretext "Let us have the other perspective..".
Can "Other perspective" to Police brutality be anything but articulated justification of the brutality itself?
---
