Strike a balance

Strike a balance

FPJ BureauUpdated: Saturday, June 01, 2019, 07:53 AM IST
article-image

Let us not delude ourselves. Punjab would not have been rid of the terrorist threat but for the conscious policy adopted by the police and the civil administration to give no quarter to the Khalistani terrorists and their accomplices. And that policy in a nutshell was `take no prisoners.’ With the express nod of the then Prime Minister Narasimha Rao and the determined leadership of the then Punjab Chief Minister Beant Singh, the Punjab Police, under the steely-willed K P S Gill went about weeding out the terrorists and their associates. There were certainly a number of excesses by the police; often completely innocent people suffered for merely being present at the wrong time at the wrong place. But, as any one living in Punjab would certify, for once terrorists were running scared.  Punjab was made safe for peace-loving citizens by the deliberate ruthlessness of the State. Yes, Gill became a targeted man, living behind a fortress of human and brick-and- mortar walls. Beant Singh was killed. However, it is an undisputed fact that it was the ‘take no prisoners’ approach which finally bore success in extinguishing the threat of random killings by armed desperadoes who used religion as a shield to rape, plunder and hold the entire people to ransom.

Now, we are neither justifying encounter killings as a state policy, nor are we condemning it. We are only stating the facts as they were in the case of Punjab, a peaceful state till the perfidy of Indira Gandhi allowed it to be sucked into the terrorist cauldron when she propped up one Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale to embarrass the then Akali-BJP State Government. Bhindranwale went on to become a Frankenstein, refusing to be tamed by his erstwhile creators. It is notable that during  Operation Bluestar he could have been taken alive but there were clear orders to the army not to risk a potential headache. Indeed, as anyone would know the crime syndicates in big metros were sought to be eliminated, with the police following the same old `take no prisoners’ policy. You will recall how till very recently, ordinary people celebrated so-called `encounter specialists’ in the Mumbai Police. That was till they blotted their copybook by hooking up with rival gangs or by turning freelance extortionists.

Why are we recounting the history of encounter killings? Well, the reason is that a few days ago the Supreme Court laid down procedures for the police and the civil administration to follow in case of encounter deaths. These are welcome, given that various police forces have flagrantly abused the `take no prisoners’ policy to settle personal scores, to extort money, to hide their own incompetence in dealing with ordinary crimes in an efficient manner through painstaking investigations, etc. Encounter killings had become the default option of the police to hide their own corruption and criminality. Old-fashioned policing, gathering information through beat constables who maintain a rapport with the local citizenry, and cultivated informants are virtually non-existent now.   Instead, when their bosses tick them off for growing crime, the local police invariably tend to resort to `encounter killings.’ Without doubt, some of the deaths in so-called encounters throughout the country were plain and simple cold-blooded murders.

The apex court has now laid down an intricate drill to be followed in every such case, from an impartial investigation to an enquiry by a judicial magistrate, to a video-graphed autopsy, etc. Welcome as these steps are, the problem would arise, say, in the Maoist-dominated areas, where the police and the paramilitary forces operate under great disadvantage.  The apex court too has noted the constraints under which the police operate in extremist-infested areas. Clearly, a certain leeway would have to be provided to the civil and police authorities so that they are not routinely overwhelmed by the superior surprise-and-surround Maoist squads. The police cannot be expected to fight with their hands tied behind their backs by the fear of several inquiries on the one hand, and the barbarity and ruthlessness of the enemy. The moral dilemma in such conditions is hard to resolve. We do think that like in the case of Punjab in the early ’90s, a wider political consensus ought to be reached in order to wipe out the growing Maoist threat in large swathes of the country. In short, the `take no prisoners’ policy cannot be completely abandoned. That would be a boon for the armed extremists.

RECENT STORIES

Analysis: Anonymous Electoral Bonds Reined In — But What About Anonymous Cash Donations?

Analysis: Anonymous Electoral Bonds Reined In — But What About Anonymous Cash Donations?

Editorial: Need To Look After The Aged

Editorial: Need To Look After The Aged

Editorial: Government Cannot Be Run From Jail

Editorial: Government Cannot Be Run From Jail

Decentralisation Can Build Better Cities

Decentralisation Can Build Better Cities

Analysis: Elections Are The True Test Of Democracy

Analysis: Elections Are The True Test Of Democracy