DALIT ONLINE –
e News Weekly
Spreading the light of humanity & freedom
Editor: Nagaraja.M.R.. Vol.14..Issue.24........17 / 06 / 2018
Editorial
: UNFIT people selected as Judges , Police ,
Prosecutors
Our whole hearted respects to honest few in judiciary , bar , legal
profession , police & public service. This article is only
directed towards few rogues in the legal profession , police , Read the
following web pages , it is only the tip of ice berg. UNFIT
candidates lacking merit , honesty , integrity are being selected
as judges , police , public prosecutors , taluk / district magistrates
through illegal means. On top of all , these people behave
like rogues on common people while kowtowing before
rich crooks.
Therefore , all the people arrested , charge sheeted by police are NOT
criminals , in the same way all people convicted by judges are NOT
criminals. As there may be CRIMINALS in Khaki , Judicial robe ,
lawyer’s gown itself.
Few advocates in favourable terms with powers that be & benefitting from it don’t argue cases impartially. They take the
sides of wrong doers , errant judges and
silence the voices seeking justice, when
they themselves cann’t do their duties properly. . WHO ARE THESE GREAT
ADVOCATES , JUDGES TO DICTATE TERMS ? Everybody
is subservient before law , constitution
of the land . In this way Justice Karnan
, Advocate Dushyanth Dave , others
were silenced.
During
trial of a case , as accused is subjected to thorough
background check by prosecution , police & judges. In the same way
people , defendants , parties in cases have a right to examine
thoroughly the antecedents , back grounds of public
prosecutors , lawyers , police , judges handling the case to ascertain
whether they are honest or rogues.
Jai Hind. Vande Mataram.
Your’s
sincerely ,
Nagaraja
Mysuru Raghupathi.
45% Of Lawyers In India Are Fake: Chairman Of Bar Council
The Chairman of the Bar Council of India (BCI) told Supreme Court (SC)
judges that, according to statistics from the BCI’s ongoing verification
process, 45% of lawyers in India are fake.
The SC judges voiced concern over the prevalence of fake lawyers in the
country. The Chief Justice said “I am so happy that BCI has started the
verification process. But it is not only about people with false degrees, but
also those with no degrees. These people work without a licence. They go to
court and practice without any authority. We need to start much before, right
from the institutions.”
In August 2015, Mishra had reported that as many as 30% of lawyers could
be fake, adding that acquiring certain numbers would take some more months. The
verification drive was mildly controversial and prolonged, even causing the
postponement of BCI elections. The
Supreme Court had given the
BCI till January 2017 to complete its verification drive.
11 Years After Famous SC Judgement On Police Reforms, Know What The
Judgement Was & Where Do We Stand
Even after eleven years of the supreme court asking all states and the
Centre to bring in reforms to make the police force more people-centric than
ruler-centric not much has changed on the ground.
During our colonial time common people like farmers, small business
owners, activists among others had to fear the sound of Police. Colonial police
structure is based on mistrust, and the image associated with it was tough. Did
this change after independence?? Do we see police as a sign of relief or
trouble?? Can we go to a police station and register a complaint without fear
or “money”? When faced with danger do we call police or friends?
Our Prime Minister Narendra Modi was correct in saying that we need a
SMART police. Police should be sensitive, mobile, alert, reliable and
techno-savvy. But, the real question is how long we are supposed to wait to get
such a police force? After almost 70 years of independence, we are still
governed majorly by Indian Police Act (IPA) of 1861.
British colonisers drafted IPA as a direct consequence of the Revolt of
1857. It was based on colonial distrust of the lower ranks. The decision making
lies with few high-placed police officers while constables merely followed
orders. After Independence, efforts were made to change, but the police system
still remains almost intact.
Supreme Court Judgement
On 22nd Dec 2006, the Supreme Court of India delivered a historic judgement in Prakash Singh Vs Union of India instructing the central and state governments to comply with a set of seven directives that laid down practical mechanism to kick-start police reforms.
On 22nd Dec 2006, the Supreme Court of India delivered a historic judgement in Prakash Singh Vs Union of India instructing the central and state governments to comply with a set of seven directives that laid down practical mechanism to kick-start police reforms.
The court sought to achieve functional autonomy to the police and
enhanced police accountability through its directives. The court’s directives
in a nutshell are:
- Constitute a State Security Commission (SSC)
to ensure that the state government does not exercise unwarranted
influence or pressure on the police. SSC will also lay down broad policy
guideline and evaluate the performance of the state police.
- Ensure that the DGP is appointed through the
merit-based transparent process and secure a minimum tenure of two years.
- Even police officers on operational duties
(Including Superintendents of Police in-charge of Districts and Station
House Officer in-charge of a police station) are also provided minimum
tenure of 2 years.
- Separation of
investigative and law and order Functions of the police.
- Set up a Police Establishment Board to
decide on transfers, postings, promotions and other service related
matters of police officers of and below the rank of Deputy Superintendent
of Police (DSP) and recommend the same for officers above the rank of DSP.
- Set up Police Complaints Authority at
state and district level to inquire into public complaints against police
officers in cases of serious misconduct.
- Set up National Security Commission at
the Union level to prepare a panel for selection and placement of Chiefs
of the Central Police Organisations with a minimum tenure of two years
Did we see any change after the judgement??
Power is something very important for our politicians. How can they lose such power and influence over our powerful police??
Power is something very important for our politicians. How can they lose such power and influence over our powerful police??
First of all, the judgement rattled our politicians. They feared the
loss of power and eight states (Andhra Pradesh, Gujarat, Punjab, Jammu & Kashmir,
Karnataka, Maharashtra, Tamil Nadu and Uttar Pradesh) in an attempt to hold on
to that power filed review petitions. However, all these petitions were
dismissed by Supreme Court on Aug 23rd, 2007. They had no intention to reform
our police force unless forced.
Since the order, 17 states have passed new Acts while 12 have issued
executive orders. Almost none followed the SC order either in letter or spirit.
These Acts, unfortunately, were passed to circumvent the implementation of the
court’s directions. The states took advantage of a provision in the judgement
that its orders would be operative “till such time a new Model Police Act is
prepared by the central government and/or the state government pass the
requisite legislation”.
“When the supreme court order came, the states quickly latched on to the
part of it which said the order must be followed until new acts are passed.
Thus states quickly passed new acts in order to not to follow SC directions on
police reforms” says former Uttar Pradesh DG Prakash Singh who fought for 10
years to get SC pass the orders.
On May 17th, 2008 the SC constituted a monitoring committee headed by
Justice KT Thomas to oversee the implementation of its directives. The
committee in its report submitted in 2010 said: “practically no state has fully
complied with those directives so far, in letter and spirit.” It also expressed
its “dismay over the total indifference to the issue of reforms in the
functioning of police being exhibited by the states”.
In many states, the composition of State Security Commission is not
independent of the political influence of ruling party. Most states have
avoided having the opposition leader in the commission, and independent members
were kept away. Independence of DGP is of paramount importance. Many states
have refused to give more than one-year fixed tenure to DGP. Even reasons for
his removal have been kept vague with grounds ranging from public interest,
administrative exigencies and incapacitation.
Model Police Act was drafted by Former Attorney Soli Sorabjee way back
in 2006. Instead of hearing news of Model Police Act being implemented we are
still hearing about pleas that are being filed in SC for implementation.
Demand for police reforms is not a new one. People have demanded reforms
in police even before our independence. Various commissions and committees like
Ribero Committee, Padmanabhaiah Committee, Malinath Committee, National Police
Commission, etc. have submitted multiple recommendations and reports. These
reports are just collecting specks of dust with none completely implemented.
If the states and centre took the judgement of our SC as an opportunity
to undo their historical mistakes, we would have seen a better police force. It
is not all that bad, some positive changes have been made and incorporated into
our Police Acts, it is just that they are not good enough.
To those politicians saying that judiciary is stepping beyond its
boundary into legislative and executive functions, let us not forget that
judiciary reacted after our legislative failed to act for 60 years. Our
politicians should move beyond questions like who should control Delhi Police?
Who should control CBI? They should not fight with Election Commission for
transferring their favourites before elections.
Autonomy of our police forces, independence from political influence is
a must for police to perform their job professionally. They should not fear
frequent transfers and “punishment postings”. Let us hope that our politicians
will realise that they are behaving in the same way our colonial masters
behaved. Let us hope that they rise above desires like power and start valuing
autonomy when it comes to the functioning of our police.
Let us request Prime Minister Narendra Modi to implement the directives
by Supreme Court, you can sign the petition here: Implement Supreme Court’s
Directives on Police Reforms
Honorable
Prime Minister of India
Honorable Lieutenant Governors and Administrators of Union Territories of India
Honorable Chief Ministers of all States of India
Honorable Lieutenant Governors and Administrators of Union Territories of India
Honorable Chief Ministers of all States of India
We live in an age where the paper is disappearing away from our lives.
When information can fit in the palm of our hands. But, articles written in
1861 are still governing us. We are standing mute and doing nothing to improve
our policing ( Indian Police Act). We need a big step to modernize our police.
Sadly, the British Colonial Policing system is still ruling our policing, and
so the distrust we had for the British India continues for our police. Our
Investigation process is slothful. Mob lynching is rampant in our country as
violators are not scared of law enforcement agency. Today, A victim lacks
access to justice; the criminal is not afraid at all.
The global average ratio of police-population is 270 to 100,000, where it’s 120 in India. Under List II, Section 7 of the Indian constitution, only States have powers to implement or amend laws on Police.
In 1996, two retired DGPs Prakash Singh, and NK Singh filed a PIL seeking Supreme court's order to Center and states for massive overhauling of their police. After ten long years of reviewing, The Supreme Court issued seven directives to states and UTs of India in 2006 to implement, which have not been followed by state government
The Seven Directives by The Supreme Court.
1.Constitute a State Security Commission (SSC) to
ensure that the state government does not exercise unwarranted influence or
pressure on the police. SSC will also lay down broad policy guideline and
evaluate the performance of the state police.
2. Ensure that the DGP is appointed through the merit-based transparent process and secure a minimum tenure of two years.
3.Even police officers on operational duties (Including Superintendents
of Police in-charge of Districts and Station House Officer in-charge of a
police station) are also provided minimum tenure of 2 years.
4. Separation of investigative and law and order Functions of the police.
5.Set up a Police Establishment Board to decide on
transfers, postings, promotions and other service related matters of police
officers of and below the rank of Deputy Superintendent of Police (DSP) and
recommend the same for officers above the rank of DSP.
6.Set up a Police Complaints Authority at state and
district level to inquire into public complaints against police officers in
cases of serious misconduct.
7.Set up National Security Commission at the Union
level to prepare a panel for selection and placement of Chiefs of the Central
Police Organisations with a minimum tenure of two years
My Suggestion:
8. Promote community policing among the citizens.
9. Install CCTV and Biometric system in all 20,000 or more police stations in India.
9. Install CCTV and Biometric system in all 20,000 or more police stations in India.
Recently, Chief Justice of India, Justice Khehar, expressed his anguish over the reluctance of states for not implementing the Directives on Police reforms announced in 2006. Earlier, many committees like Gore Committee on Police Training, the National Police Commission, The Ribeiro Committee on Police Reforms, The Padmanabhaiah Committee on Police Reforms have been able to break the dichotomy between the State Governments and the Supreme Court.
India is vulnerable to both Internal and external security threats.
While our Jawans in Olive Green are taking charge to prevent external threats,
it's the time to empower our Jawans in khaki to clear internal threats.
Training and engagement are critical prerequisites; our police require to
become world-class. We cannot achieve economic sustainability unless we
make our policing sound. We need a safe and healthy environment for the growth
of our country. I urge and request that every state government implement the
Supreme Court's directives on police reforms in the country.
Civilisations across the world have, in
their evolution over the centuries, witnessed the progressive transfer of the
power of governance to the people themselves. Democracy has now come to be the
most acceptable form of self-governance .
Political parties have a major role to
play in democracies. They may avowedly pursue different ideologies and project
some long-term objectives of national significance. But, as a matter of
strategy, they get focused on short-term temporal gains in order to gain the
support of influential political groups and individuals. In such a context,
bribery and corruption become fair game.
Corruption of this kind inevitably
spills over onto the administrative structure of a democracy. The permanent
services, which actually run the government, function under the close view of
expectant politicians in power at different levels, and are frequently
pressured to behave in a partisan manner. Even senior functionaries in the
services are not exempt from this pressure. Yet, even if a few among them
succumb to such pressure, the system gets weakened and vulnerable to extraneous
influences and considerations — which is prejudicial to public interest, fair
play and justice.
Every country has its own formalised
mechanism to check, investigate and penalise corruption in the services; but in
practice this is mostly seen to be effective only at the lower levels in the
administration, leaving the higher echelons with political connections free
from exposure and punishment. The fruits of democracy are thus ultimately
denied to a gullible people, who are taken in by the eloquent rhetoric and
passionate appeal of the politicians, most of whom focus on emotive issues.
Over time, in people's perception, politicians benefit directly from the
system, more visibly and substantially than the people themselves. This
difference gets more marked in countries where large sections of the voting
people are more ignorant and poor by middle-class standards.
International transactions of a
commercial nature, even between governments, have also now become susceptible
to venal practices. The infamous Bofors deal of the last decade and the
outrageous oil-for-food scam connected with Iraq in recent years have pointed
to corrupt links between the power brokers and influence peddlers in the
contracting countries. Corruption is now perceived as a global malaise,
seriously impeding the desired growth of the developed as well as developing
nations. The Corruption Perceptions Index for 2006 compiled by Transparency
International shows a "significant worsening in perceived levels of
corruption in several countries, including the US, Israel and Brazil". In
recent elections to the House and the Senate in the US, it has been reported
that the perceived increase in corruption in administration and public life had
considerably influenced the voting against the party in power.
In this context it is very welcome that
the Supreme Court of India delivered a landmark judgment in September,
categorically directing the police system in the country to be freed from the
exclusive control of politically oriented governments, and made to function
with professional autonomy and accountability to an independent authority. This
model delineating the command and control of investigating agencies needs to be
enforced in all countries if democracy is to survive the onslaught of power
politics. So those chief ministers protesting against the apex court's order
are on the wrong track.
But how is this reform to be achieved?
The pressure for reform has to come from outside the system, namely from the
people who have voted the system into place. As the ultimate victims of
corruption, they would require advice, guidance and support from former members
of the system who are knowledgeable and public-spirited.
Therefore, it makes sense for the
former chiefs of law enforcement agencies in some important democratic
countries to get together and evolve measures to secure the professional
autonomy of these agencies so that they can be people-oriented in their performance.
It is now an appropriate time to make such a move. Multilateral agencies like
the IMF and World Bank should support such a step, since it would ensure that
their funds to aid community development the world over are protected.
Public
Prosecutor Appointment Scam
Four Arrested
in Delhi Police Recruitment Scam
KPSC ,
Scam
Judge
Selection Illegal
Top police
official in Kerala allegedly caught red-handed while copying in LL.M. exam
Judges
Suspended For Mass Copying
Edited, printed , published owned by NAGARAJA.M.R. @ # LIG-2 No 761, HUDCO FIRST STAGE , OPP WATER WORKS , LAXMIKANTANAGAR , HEBBAL ,MYSURU – 570017 KARNATAKA
INDIA Cell : 91 8970318202
WhatsApp 91 8970318202
Contact : editor@dalitonline.in
No comments:
Post a Comment