| April 8, 2002 | Monday | Muharram 24, 1423 |
Please Visit our Sponsor (Ads open in separate window)
Capital’s Nazim
Traffic accidents & society
REJECTING as many as 350 objections raised by the provinces and federal ministries to the proposed police act, the National Reconstruction Bureau has recommended its promulgation. This negates the very purpose of the presidential order, which had directed the NRB to satisfy the provinces and the ministries before the act became a law. Most objections had to do with fears that the act gave unbridled powers to the police to infringe on citizens’ civil rights. A four-member team, of whom only one was an NRB consultant and three were career police officers, drafted the controversial act. Human rights groups and lawyers from across the country have opposed the proposed act in its existing form. It is disquieting to note that the NRB’s behaviour tended to show a touch of arrogance in refusing to listen to the provincial governments, which would be responsible for implementing the proposed act — law and order being a provincial subject.
Addressing some of the contentions raised by concerned citizens, the president — pending the promulgation of the revised police act — had amended the Police Act of 1861 in December last. The amendment empowered the district Nazim to visit a police station and to order a police officer to set a wrongfully detained suspect free. The idea was to set the tone for the proposed law, and allay the misgivings by creating some balance of power between the writs of an elected Nazim and the police. The amendment also bound the district police officer to proceed against a police officer for wrongful conduct, if a Nazim so complained. For his part, the Nazim was restrained from interfering in matters pertaining to police administration and its function of prosecution. In case there was a dispute between a DPO and a Nazim, the district public safety commission’s writ were to prevail. The provincial public safety commissions were to play the role of a watchdog over those at the district level, and any further disputes could be referred to these. It was despite these balancing acts that the provinces still filed 350 objections, seeking a further reduction in the powers of the police under the proposed law, which the NRB refused to entertain.
It seems it was left to the drafters of the act whom to consult and whom to ignore, even if those ignored deserved to be consulted. The judiciary, for one, was not made part of any known consultations. The objections raised by the provinces, the establishment and interior ministry and the home departments, thus, represented the concerns articulated by professional bodies and the citizenry at large. If the reports that the new act will empower the police to enter people’s homes and arrest suspects without a warrant or detain citizens for 24 hours “because they refused to obey a police order” are correct, then the presidential amendments to the act do not address these issues. For, by the time a Nazim comes to the rescue of a wrongfully detained citizen, and a possible dispute between him and a district police officer is resolved, the citizen will have been detained for 24 hours. This is where the proposed law falls flat on its face, and human rights groups are bound to challenge it in court. The president should put his foot down, and unless exhaustive consultations with the concerned citizens are held and all such fears have been allayed, the ordinance should not be given final approval.
DESPITE commitments made every now and then over the past six months by various government officials that local government polls in the Islamabad Capital Territory will be held soon, the date for these elections has still not been announced, although it is widely believed they will be held in June. It is, however, disturbing to note from a report in Dawn that the government may be trying to impose its own candidate on the people of Islamabad for the post of district Nazim. Apart from the fact that the intelligence agencies are said to be actively gathering information on aspiring and other possible candidates, the report also said that a high level meeting of army officers would be held this week to decide on the most “suitable” candidate for the local government polls in Islamabad. This goes against the very spirit of holding local government elections — that the people of Islamabad should decide whom they want as their mayor.
True, Islamabad may not have a political culture of its own as it is by and large a city of settlers, whose jobs keep them here. But over the years, there has been a considerable increase in the city’s population, which has resulted in raising the number of seats — from one to two — for the federal territory in the national assembly. Even otherwise, what is wrong with giving the bureaucrats and their families a voice in deciding who represents them? Their civic problems are the same as those faced by other citizens of Islamabad. Obviously, the residents of the captial, as people elsewhere, want a candidate who would look after their welfare and their interests. If a mayor looks after government interests instead of the people’s, then this defeats the very purpose of having local government elections. Besides, our intelligence agencies could surely be put to better use in internal security matters, particularly in looking for and flushing out potential terrorists, rather than in helping the government find the best candidate for district Nazim, Islamabad.
YET another life has been lost on Karachi’s roads. A two-year-old boy was run over and crushed to death by a bus in the city’s upscale Defence area. The accident happened close to a shanty town, whose residents came out to protest against the death of the child. Meanwhile, the rest of the city carried on normal life, with most people probably oblivious of the day’s tragic event and the violent reaction. The inevitable accusations followed and were duly hurled at the transporters and the police. But the question is: are only these two sections of society responsible for traffic accidents and reckless driving? What about society at large?
One would like to ask where are all the NGOs, women’s groups, parent-teacher societies, consumer rights organizations, religious and community leaders and even political parties in this game of life and death on our roads. Why are there no calls for the transport and traffic system to be changed? Could the reason possibly be that many of the opinion-makers and NGO leaders do not use public transport themselves, or walk the roads as pedestrians? Besides, how many of our educational institutions make it a point to teach their students road sense or traffic rules?
The role of parents is, unfortunately, not helpful either because they let their underage wards drive or because they often drive with young children sitting in their laps. This phenomenon is now well established: society chooses to do nothing, but whenever a tragedy occurs it stirs into laments, blames the bus driver and the police and then forgets all about it. Has society itself done anything substantive to make itself heard on the issue of road safety or reckless driving? Apart from poor people living in shanties, one cannot recall middle or upper-middle class people making themselves heard on this issue. The intention here is not to shield the police or errant bus drivers. Far from it. But to suggest that reforming only the police and the transporters will solve the problem is both unrealistic and naive.