( December 1, 2012, Hong Kong, Sri Lanka Guardian) The Surendranagar firing that killed
three Dalit youth on 21 September this year has once again brought to
light the concern, that in India, the police do not have adequate
training nor the government has necessary resolve to overhaul the police
service into one that fits a modern democracy. An affidavit filed by
the Gujarat State Police in the case affirms that police used weapons
like AK-47 to fire upon the crowd to disperse it.
The case is an example of how the
police across the country treat protesters and public gathering. It is
indeed true that in this case the police were trying to disperse two
fighting factions. However, the allegation that of the two factions
engaged in the brawl, only Dalits were killed and injured underlines
the fact that in police actions involving Dalits, the Dalits could
suffer the worst and suggests clear discrimination against the
community. The AHRC is informed that in states like Gujarat, conditions
of Dalits are worse, and the Surendranagar incident is an unfortunate
example.
The details of the incident available
with the AHRC, suggests that the local police refused to intervene at
appropriate time, that otherwise could have on the first place prevented
the event escalating into one that resulted in loss of lives. It is
reported that the Superintendent of Police could not intervene or send
adequate police force to contain the violence at an early stage because
the officer and his troupes were busy providing escort to the state
Chief Minister for his political rally where the minister was churning
up Hindu fundamentalist religious sentiments to fortify his party's
political domination of the state and upon its people.
The presence of heavily armed police
officers is a common scene in India during protest gatherings. This is
worse when such gatherings are organised by civil society groups, though
hardly any civil society groups have questioned this armed police
presence in protest gatherings. This is a crude manner in which the
state tries to communicate with the subjects that it has the muscle and
firepower to silence all forms of descent. The display of brute power
is worse when such protests are against authoritarian development
projects, organised by farmers and peasants. In states like Orissa and
Madhya Pradesh, such arms display is also sponsored by private companies
that have colluded with the respective state administrations and have
succeeded in pushing peasant farmers and members of the indigenous
communities into the verge of existence and peril. Indeed every such
gathering does not result in a police firing, though brute force used by
the police to disperse the gathering with sticks and torture are
common. That the possibility of the police firing at the people is not
an exception is a fact proved by dozens of such incidents reported from
the country, Surendranagar included. It is however common for the
police to open fire at public gatherings in the northeastern states,
most importantly in Manipur, which is cited as another form of state
sponsored discrimination against the people living in that region.
At the core of the debate is what is
the police's role in maintaining law and order? There are laws in India
that provide processes with which the authorities should deal with
legitimate requests for organising protests. Ideally these regulations
should be limited to prevent public nuisance, since the right to
peacefully protest should be zealously guaranteed in a functioning
democracy. Often the organisers of protests do not follow these
procedures since they are discouraged by deep-rooted corruption and
arbitrariness in the manner in which such applications are dealt with by
the authorities, including the police. Often the police disperse the
gathering by use of force, in some of the most disgraceful manner.
The overall culture of impunity enjoyed
by the police across the country, let the authorities order the police
to use brute force. People and police officers get injured in these
events and properties get destroyed. An impartial investigation is never
expected into these incidents, neither would the state compensate for
the injuries sustained by the people and the police officers or for the
properties destroyed in such avoidable events.
In this year alone there have been at
least a few dozen of such incidents reported from India. Over the span
of the past decade hundreds of such incidents have been reported from
the country. However, there is yet no interest for the government or
among most of the civil society in India to question whether such
incidents could be avoided, and if so, what should be done. The country
visibly lacks adequate number of civil society campaigns to reform the
manner in which the police functions in India.
What is witnessed on the contrary is
the public display of barbarity, in the name of crowd control. The
police on the other hand are preoccupied with everything else other
than their legitimate job, like what is evident in the Surendranagar
incident, of providing escort to political heavyweights. The police as
an establishment also lack proper training and resources to undertake
their job, as required in a democratic society that respects the rights
of individuals to peacefully protest.
Concerning the Surendranagar incident,
the actions or the lack of it, by the state police should be thoroughly
investigated. Policies that allow arming of police officers with
deadly and at the same time useless weapons like the AK-47s that is
least useful to subdue a crowd should be reviewed. The allegation that
the police have discriminated the Dalits while controlling the mob must
be thoroughly investigated. At the very least the officers responsible
for causing the death of three Dalit youth must be brought to trial
and the families compensated for the loss they have suffered.- Source AHRC
For information and comments: Bijo Francis, AHRC. Telephone: + 852 - 26986 339, Email: india@ahrc.asia
