A Bengali daily editorial highlights the contentious issue of complaints of corruption and irregularities against police, and the propriety of enquiring organisations that are supposed to look into such allegations for remedial action. Reportedly, police leadership has taken serious exception to the formation of two committees by the Ministry of Home Affairs to look into sensitive complaints of police delinquency and has termed such actions as interference into the internal management of a disciplined outfit. Police officials have also discussed the matter with the Home Minister. 

The above subject attracts the provisions of laws, rules, and regulations as also the time-honoured practices stretching over a long period of our administrative and regulatory experience. The Rules of Business of the government and allocation of business and functions between ministry and the department in addition to the ethos of a disciplined public service become relevant in the context of the reported uneasiness. Emerging political reality, ground conditions relating to the complexion of services and also the facets of inter-services rivalry, perhaps, cannot be brushed aside in trying to appreciate the reported action and reaction. 

While the matter would hopefully be disposed of on its merit, this writer wishes to dwell on citizen involvement in mitigating law enforcement deviations. This dimension assumes significance as citizens are the victims of law enforcement excesses and indiscretions, and thus interventions and actions beyond the formal channel are expected to prove complementary and salutary. 

We could possibly dilate on citizen involvement models. Such models refer to organisational accountability bodies, composed wholly or in part of citizens that provide some level of oversight over police operations. Traditionally, citizen involvement models have focused on how police departments investigate complaints filed by citizens against officers. In recent years, some citizen involvement models have expanded their focus to include overseeing use-of-force investigations, issuing annual reports, providing outreach to citizens in the community.

One could refer to external 'citizen oversight' models. These organisations are generally separate from the police department, with offices in a separate location. They often take citizen complaints and perform their own investigations. Many of these organisations are composed entirely of private citizens, although some also include police personnel.

There is, however, no one universal model of citizen involvement. Rather citizen participation models are organic, emerging from a host of local variables, and the model is largely dependent on the police and the community and the history of the relationship between these two groups.

It is relevant to note that among topics of police excesses, officers' use of force has attracted the most attention. The authority to use physical coercion and deadly force distinguishes the police from other types of organisations. Despite the consequences for citizens when this authority is misused or abused, use of force has only been subject to meaningful organisational constraints only recently.

Concerned citizens could think of specific issues to be discussed in a workshop. For example, a workshop could be convened to discuss how best to collect data on excessive use of force. Participants of such workshops could include police officials, lawyers, researchers, and civil society members. An important issue of concern could be the lack of a single source of information like court records, citizen complaints, police reports that would provide the complete picture of incidents.   

It is significant to note that police officers are the public officials that society has authorised, even obliged, to use force if needed. Ensuring that police officers use the warrant equitably, legally, and economically on behalf of citizens is at the core of police administration.

The experience of a police officer in the United States provides valuable insights: "Challenging police wrongdoing is hard for some: many officers cover themselves in a narrative of heroism, sacrifice and risk whenever their actions are questioned. But, just because a person is signed on to do a dangerous job does not give him or her right to maliciously injure or recklessly take the lives of the people that police officers are sworn to serve and protect. And when an officer stops serving and protecting, he or she should be severely punished both for the violation of that person's rights and the violation of the public's trust." 

Law enforcement agencies generally do not make earnest efforts to first acknowledge the pattern of abuse that exists unless they are forced. Policies can be useful but if it is not followed and there are no consequences for failing to do so, it won't help. Insisting on accountability does not make one anti-law enforcement or pro-criminals; it means demanding responsible law enforcement that is serving, not defending against, the community.

The writer is a columnist of The Daily Star.