The state of policing in India has been a subject of intense scrutiny and debate for decades. Numerous commissions and committees have been formed, reports compiled, and recommendations made, all with the stated aim of reforming the police force. Yet, the reality on the ground remains largely unchanged. This article argues that the persistent failure to implement meaningful police reforms is not due to a lack of ideas but rather a lack of political will. Political executives have consistently engaged in performative action, creating the illusion of reform while actively resisting any substantive change that might threaten their control over the police apparatus.
Since India's independence, a plethora of committees have been established to examine and recommend improvements to the police system. These include the Working Group on Police (1966), the National Police Commission (NPC), the Ribeiro Committee (1998), the Padmanabhiah Committee (2000), and the Ram Pradhan Committee (post-26/11 Mumbai attacks), among others. Additionally, independent research and reports, such as "The Indian Police System - a reform proposal" by Ebba Martensson and "Accountability for the Indian Police" by Adam Shinar from HRLN, have also contributed to the discourse on police reform.
However, a recurring theme emerges: these reports, often meticulously researched and containing valuable recommendations, are largely ignored. They gather dust in government archives, their insights and proposals never seeing the light of implementation. This pattern reveals a clear lack of genuine commitment to reform on the part of political executives.
One glaring deficiency in many of these reform efforts is the lack of public consultation and societal representation. The Padmanabhiah Committee, for instance, comprised solely of police officers (two serving and two retired), excluding voices from civil society and the communities the police are meant to serve. This narrow composition reflects a fundamental misunderstanding of modern policing. As governments in other countries have recognized, policing is too important to be left solely to the police. The concepts of community policing and civic oversight, which have gained traction internationally, are largely absent in India.
Even when committees do address key issues, their recommendations often lack substance. The three most critical areas requiring reform – politicization and criminalization of the police, control over the police, and accountability of the police – have consistently been addressed superficially. The reports may acknowledge these problems, but they fail to propose concrete and enforceable solutions.
The fate of the Ram Pradhan Committee report, commissioned after the devastating 26/11 Mumbai attacks, serves as a stark example. Despite revealing significant shortcomings in the police's preparedness and response, many of its recommendations remain unimplemented. While the Maharashtra government claims to have made strides in improving the police system, the reality is that even basic policing functions, such as dealing with local crimes, remain inadequate in most states. The connection between local, seemingly minor offenses, and larger criminal networks is often overlooked, leading to a failure to prevent escalation.
Several systemic issues plague the police force:
- Lack of basic infrastructure: Many police stations lack essential resources, including adequate weapons, communication channels, and internet connectivity.
- Outdated training: The training curriculum remains largely unchanged for decades, failing to equip officers with the skills and knowledge needed to address modern challenges.
- Lack of proper record-keeping: Basic crime data is often not properly recorded or analyzed, hindering effective crime prevention and investigation.
- Physical unfitness: Many officers lack basic physical fitness, impacting their ability to perform their duties effectively.
These issues, combined with the politicization and criminalization of the police, create a system that is ill-equipped to serve the public. The continued failure to implement meaningful reforms is not an oversight; it is a deliberate strategy. Political executives benefit from maintaining control over the police, using them as instruments of political power and patronage. True reform would threaten this control, which is why it is consistently resisted.
The Supreme Court's Intervention and State Defiance:
In a significant move to break this cycle of inaction, the Supreme Court of India delivered a landmark judgment in the Prakash Singh case in 2006. Recognizing the urgent need for police reforms, the Court issued seven binding directives to all states and union territories. These directives aimed to:
- Constitute a State Security Commission: To insulate the police from undue political influence.
- Ensure a minimum tenure for the Director General of Police (DGP): To prevent arbitrary transfers and ensure stability in leadership.
- Establish Police Establishment Boards: To handle transfers, postings, and promotions of police officers, reducing political interference.
- Set up State Police Complaints Authorities: To provide a mechanism for addressing public grievances against the police.
- Separate investigation and law and order functions of the police: To improve specialization and efficiency.
- Ensure a minimum tenure for other police officers: To enhance professionalism and reduce political pressure.
- Establish a National Security Commission: To oversee police reforms at the national level.
However, despite the Supreme Court's clear directives, most states have shown blatant disregard for the judgment. They have either failed to implement the directives altogether or have enacted laws that dilute their intent. This defiance represents a direct contempt of court and demonstrates the deep-seated resistance to relinquishing political control over the police.
The cycle of forming committees, generating reports, and then shelving them is a cynical charade. It creates the perception of action without any real change. This pattern of posturing and procrastination must end. True police reform requires a fundamental shift in political will, a genuine commitment to empowering the police to serve the public rather than the interests of those in power. Until this happens, the illusion of reform will continue, and the Indian public will continue to suffer the consequences of an ineffective and often abusive police force. The continued non-compliance with the Supreme Court's directives further underscores the urgent need for stronger mechanisms to enforce judicial pronouncements and hold political executives accountable.
