During his address to the DGsP/ IGsP conference (October 6, 2005) the Prime Minister of India announced the intent of the Government to set up a Police Mission the Missions will seek to transform the Police Forces in the country into effective instrument for maintenance of internal security and to face the challenges by equipping them with the necessary material, intellectual and organizational resources.
A two-tier system consisting of an Empowered Steering Group (ESG) chaired by the Home Minister and under this Group, an Executive Committee (EC) chaired by the Home Secretary has been established. In order to achieve the objective of the NPM, the following six Micro Missions (MMs) have been established:
MM:01 Human Resource Development (Police Population Ratio – Career Progression – Leadership -Accountability – Performance Evaluation Training – Attitudinal Changes – Welfare of Police Personnel- Police University, etc) MM:02 Community Policing (Involving Community in Policing – Police Interface with Media, Industry and other relevant segments- Police Image, etc)
State Security Commission: Supreme Court Directive
ADVERTISEMENTS:
The State Governments are directed to constitute a State Security Commission in every State to ensure that the State Government does not exercise unwarranted influence or pressure on the State police and for laying down the broad policy guidelines so that the State police always act according to the laws of the land and the Constitution of the country.
This watchdog body shall be headed by the Chief Minister or Home Minister as Chairman and have the DGP of the State as its ex-officio Secretary. The other members of the Commission shall be chosen in such a manner that it is able to function independent of Government control.
The recommendations of this Commission shall be binding on the State Government. The functions of the State Security Commission would include laying down the broad policies and giving directions for the performance of the preventive tasks and service oriented functions of the police, evaluation of the performance of the State police and preparing a report thereon for being placed before the State legislature.
To shield the police from the undue interference of politicians and ensure appropriate policy directions, the Supreme Court requires the establishment of a State Security Commission.
ADVERTISEMENTS:
Director General of Police (DGP): Supreme Court Directive
The Director General of Police of the State shall be selected by the State Government from amongst the three senior-most officers of the Department who have been empanelled for promotion to that rank by the Union Public Service Commission on the basis of their length of service, very good record and range of experience for heading the police force. And, once he has been selected for the job, he should have a minimum tenure of at least two years irrespective of his date of superannuation.
The DGP may, however, be relieved of his responsibilities by the State Government acting in consultation with the State Security Commission consequent upon any action taken against him following conviction in a criminal offence or in a case of corruption, or if he is otherwise incapacitated from discharging his duties.
To ensure that there is no arbitrariness in the appointment of the highest ranking police officer, the Supreme Court has laid down the procedure for selecting the Director General of Police (DGP).
ADVERTISEMENTS:
Minimum Tenure for Other Police Officers: Supreme Court Directive
Police Officers on operational duties in the field like the Inspector General of Police in-charge of Zone, Deputy Inspector General of Police in-charge of Range, Superintendent of Police in-charge of district and Station House Officer in-charge of a Police Station shall also have a prescribed minimum tenure of two years unless it is found necessary to remove them prematurely following disciplinary proceedings against them or their conviction in a criminal offence or in a case of corruption or if the incumbent is otherwise incapacitated from discharging his responsibilities. This would be subject to promotion and retirement of the officer.
Security of tenure is similarly important for other police officers on operational duties in the field. In order to help them withstand undue political interference, have time to properly understand the needs of their jurisdictions and do justice to their jobs, the Supreme Court provides for a minimum tenure of two years.
Police Establishment Board: Supreme Court Directive
ADVERTISEMENTS:
There shall be a Police Establishment Board in each State which shall decide all transfers, postings, promotions and other service related matters of officers of and below the rank of Deputy Superintendent of Police.
The Establishment Board shall be a departmental body comprising the Director General of Police and four other senior officers of the Department. The State Government may interfere with decision of the Board in exceptional cases only after recording its reasons for doing so.
The Board shall also be authorized to make appropriate recommendations to the State Government regarding the posting and transfers of officers of and above the rank of Superintendent of Police, and the Government is expected to give due weight to these recommendations and shall normally accept it.
It shall also function as a forum of appeal for disposing of representations from officers of the rank of Superintendent of Police and above regarding their promotion, transfer, disciplinary proceedings or their being subjected to illegal or irregular orders and generally reviewing the functioning of the police in the State..
ADVERTISEMENTS:
To counter the prevailing practice of subjective appointments, transfers and promotions, the Supreme Court provides for the creation of a Police Establishment Board.
In effect, the Board brings these crucial service related matters largely under police control. Notably, a trend in international best practice is that government has a role in appointing and managing senior police leadership, but service related matters of other ranks remain internal matters.
National Security Commission: Supreme Court Directive
The Central Government shall set up a National Security Commission at the Union level to prepare a panel for being placed before the appropriate Appointing Authority, for selection and placement of Chiefs of the Central Police Organizations (CPO), who should also be given a minimum tenure of two years.
ADVERTISEMENTS:
The Commission would also review from time to time measures to upgrade the effectiveness of these forces, improve the service conditions of its personnel, ensure that there is proper coordination between them and that the forces are generally utilized for the purposes they were raised and make recommendations in that behalf.
The National Security Commission could be headed by the Union Home Minister and comprise heads of the CPOs and a couple of security experts as members with the Union Home Secretary as its Secretary.
Accountability
Functional autonomy must be coupled with responsibility to ensure high standards of policing. At present, there is little demonstrable accountability for wrongdoing. Rather, there is a general perception that neither the internal disciplinary mechanisms, nor the existing external oversight agencies, nor the criminal justice system are able to properly and consistently address police accountability.
Police Complaints Authority: Supreme Court Directive
There shall be a Police Complaints Authority at the district level to look into complaints against police officers of and up to the rank of Deputy Superintendent of Police. Similarly, there should be another Police Complaints Authority at the State level to look into complaints against officers of the rank of Superintendent of Police and above.
The district level authority may be headed by a retired District Judge while the State level authority may be headed by a retired Judge of the High Court/Supreme Court.
The head of the State level complaints authority shall be chosen by the State Government out of a panel of names proposed by the Chief Justice; the head of the district level complaints authority may also be chosen out of a panel of names proposed by the Chief Justice or a Judge of the High Court nominated by him.
The panel may include members from amongst retired civil servants, police officers or officers from any other department, or from the civil society.
The Supreme Court sets out an independent accountability mechanism in the form of a Police Complaints Authority to be established both at the state and the district levels. Their mandate is to look into public complaints against police officers in cases of serious misconduct.
Separation of Investigation and Law and Order Police: Supreme Court Directive
The investigating police shall be separated from the law and order police to ensure speedier investigation, better expertise and improved rapport with the people. It must, however, be ensured that there is full coordination between the two wings.
The separation, to start with, may be effected in towns/urban areas which have a population of ten lakhs or more, and gradually extended to smaller towns/urban areas also.
The Supreme Court judgment seeks to enhance police performance by directing separation of investigation and law and order functions of the police in towns and urban areas to ensure speedier investigation, better expertise and improved rapport with the people.
The Court has ordered a gradual implementation of this separation, starting with towns and urban areas with a population of one million or more.
Both investigation and law and order are vital and specific police functions, which must be streamlined separately to run concurrently. At present, it often happens that investigations are stalled if there is a pressing law and order situation, or investigations divert officers’ attention from law and order concerns.
What are needed are a vision and a new level of dedication to the task of upgrading police skills and morale.