April 2, 2002	Tuesday	Muharram 18,1423

Please Visit our Sponsor (Ads open in separate window).

ISLAMABAD, April 1: The National Reconstruction Bureau (NRB) bulldozed more than 350 objections of the provincial governments and the federal ministries to incorporate provisions in the draft police ordinance, 2002, which infringe upon civil rights and liberties by giving unbridled powers to the police.

The objections were raised by the four provincial governments and the ministries of interior, establishment, communications, Kashmir and Northern Areas and state and frontier regions on the draft ordinance prepared by the NRB, summary of comments sent by NRB to the cabinet and obtained by Dawn revealed.

Sources said President Gen Pervez Musharraf had directed the NRB to seek afresh the comments of the provinces and relevant ministries on the draft and incorporate necessary changes in the law.

Earlier, the objections raised by the provinces and the ministries were overruled by the bureau’s consultants on police reforms.

Except for NRB Consultant Z.U. Khan, the other three members of the criminal justice think tank, which drafted the ordinance, were career police officials. They were: Afzal Shigri, Z.U. Qureshi and Dr Shoib Suddle.

Citing two sections which give powers to the police to infringe the citizens’ rights, sources said sections 4(k) and 125 of the ordinance stood out as examples of what was in store.

Sources said that under section 4(k), the NRB had empowered a police officer to determine whether a person was of “loose and disorderly character” and enter any place of residence of such persons.

In its objections to the section, the interior ministry communicated to the NRB that provision of doing away with a warrant should be made only in cases where for good reasons it may not be possible to obtain a warrant. In all other cases, the entry, inspection and search of an enclosed place should be subject to a warrant obtained from a magistrate.

Overruling the objection, the NRB maintained that the section pertained to the operational duties of the police officer when he had no time to obtain a search warrant. The search of the place without warrants was subject to “reliable information” and it was for the supervisory officers and the other new external institutions to check the misuse of those powers, the NRB said.

Sources in the establishment cited the cases of extra-judicial killings and said the supervisory checks of the senior police officers in such cases were liable to be a cover for misuse of power by the police. Leaving it open for a police official to determine who is a person of “loose and disorderly” character would amount to giving the police powers to enter any person’s property on the basis of “suspicion and reliable information” concocted by police officials or their sources.

The Sindh government also recommended amendment in the clause and said the conditionality of a warrant be mandated for entry and search by the police.

The NRB, sources said, also rejected the objections of Sindh and Punjab about section 125 of the proposed ordinance which made it compulsory for the public to comply with directions of the police.

The Punjab government in its note of dissent said the proposed section might be perceived to give excessive powers to police which might be misused and might not go well with the citizens.

The proposed section 125 empowers a police officer to detain a person, who refuses to obey a directive of a police official, for up to 24 hours and then produce him in a court.

Rejecting the arguments of the Sindh government for amendments in the provision, the NRB said the “provision is necessary and in public interest” otherwise the police would be obliged to arrest even in minor cases and go through the “cumbersome procedure ending up in court increasing their workload.”

According to interior ministry officials, the powers under the section have the potential of being an instrument of abuse and any person would have to obey a command, lawful or unlawful, without having access to courts during the first 24 hours of arrest under the charge of not carrying out the command of a police officer.