Download PDF file - Human Rights Commission of Pakistan

Analysis and recommendations 53complaining against the police. It is unlikely that a victim would put himself at the risk of not only complaining againstthe police, but also taking the risk of being imprisoned for a year and having to pay an onerous fine of 50,000 rupeesin case his complaint does not meet the required standards of satisfying the PPO or the DPO of its veracity.73. RecommendationSection 73 should be deleted in its entirety.Chapter VIII: Police Accountability and OversightPart 1 - District Police CouncilIn a democracy every institution of state must bear with checks and balances to its power and open andrepeated scrutiny of its functioning. The police must accept much more scrutiny and criticism than the ordinarybecause it is a coercive force of the state. Properly constituted accountability structures increase the likelihood ofpublic trust and that a coercive force like the police does not run amok.In a truly democratic state there must be sufficient and easily accessible channels whereby people can filecomplaints against police officers, without fear, for acts of misconduct or possible criminality, and expect to receivea prompt and proper investigation. There are certain imperatives for such a body – it needs to be independent,sufficiently empowered and given adequate resources. In this regard, the DPPA falls short in relation to all theimperatives.Section 75 – EstablishmentSection 75 lays down the establishment of the District Police Council. From the face of it appears that thisCouncil is intended to act as an external accountability body to look into complaints against the police.However, by its very terminology the body is weakened. By definition the word Council means an assemblyof persons called together for consultation, deliberation, or discussion. Such a body is almost always an advisorybody. Thus, calling an accountability and oversight body as a Council would dilute the intent substantially. In contrast,calling it an Authority or Commission would give it the status it is intended to have.75. RecommendationSection 75 should be amended to read as follows:“75. Establishment – there shall be a Police Complaints Authority in every district.”Section 76 – CompositionSection 76 lays down the composition of the Council which would consist of seven members. Three ofthese members would be MPAs from the concerned district to be nominated by the Chief Minister, at least one ofwhom shall be from the opposition. The DPO would act as the Council’s secretary.The neutrality and efficacy of the Police Complaints Authority (PCA) is directly linked to its composition.The main purpose of setting up civilian oversight mechanisms is to ensure that complaints against the police will notbe influenced in an untoward or biased manner, particularly by the Executive. Independence is determined by theextent to which the body is separated from the police, the Executive and other external factors. It is established thatindependence and credibility are improved when the oversight body comprises leadership and staff drawn fromoutside government and police. The profile of the members as stipulated under Section 76 are not diverse enough toensure that functioning will be truly independent and decisions will be unbiased and fair. The presence of a servingpolice officer kills the spirit behind this body and entirely undermines the quest for independence.The composition of the body must thus be amended to ensure that it is independent and diverse.