EVEN as the armed forces launched a crucial operation in North Waziristan, an unnecessary and ill-timed ‘anti-encroachment’ operation took place in Model Town Lahore that resulted in the administration’s excessive and brutal use of the police to settle scores with a political adversary of the ruling PML-N.

It was, in fact, a clash of egos that resulted in the avoidable loss of 10 lives besides causing injuries to scores of others. Everyone came out bruised: the Punjab government headed by an impetuous chief executive; the Pakistan Awami Tehreek (PAT) chief and his supporters who allegedly promoted illegal activities; the district administration for its servile following of political bosses; and the Punjab police for their inept and ruthless use of force to please their political patrons.

The district administration and the Lahore Development Authority (LDA) have to answer some tough questions. Was the anti-encroachment drive part of a city-wide campaign in which the encroachers were given written or verbal notices in advance? Or are encroachments only being removed in the constituency of Model Town where the PML-N lost to the Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaf in the general elections?

Specifically, who gave orders to the DCO Lahore and DG LDA to remove the illegal barricades around the Minhajul Quran secretariat just a few days before the scheduled arrival of the PAT chief? Why did they choose to furtively remove the barricades at 2am? And when they met with resistance, did they seek clearance of the bosses to go in with heavy machinery and elite police contingents? Were they trying to establish the writ of the state or slavishly obeying a political command? Our civil servants must reflect on whether they are public servants or servants of the government.

The Punjab police have a lot to answer for.

The institution that has faced the most public ire and anger is the Punjab police. Like typical sycophants, the police commanders act like courtiers of the rulers. The encroachment saga and resultant bloodbath has badly exposed them for their lack of professionalism, inept handling of a law and order situation, lack of restraint in the face of provocation and blindly pandering to the wishes of their political bosses.

The Human Rights Commission of Pakis­tan is correct in saying that “this is not the first incident [in which] lack of police training or … inclination for crowd control without violence has been badly exposed”. The “incident makes it abundantly clear that there are no bounds to police brutality in action against political rivals of the parties in power,” adds the HRCP. This is a justified charge sheet against the Lahore police and as the force’s proud commander in the early 1990s, I hang my head in shame now. This was a command failure.

The Lahore police chief (made ‘officer on special duty’ after the incident) must be asked whether he took the inspector general, who assumed charge the day this ill-timed operation was carried out, into confidence. Did he know of the attempt to remove barricades at 2am by the district administration that took along only 10 policemen and had to retreat after resistance by the PAT security staff? Is it true that after only initial resistance, the police chief chose to enlist the support of elite police commandos trained for encounters with terrorists and outlaws?

Was this kind of heavy-handed response planned by the police command or did they get specific orders from bureaucratic or political channels to remove the barricades even if it meant using force? Under the media glare, the superintendent of police leading the operation was badly exposed in allowing a PML-N activist to resort to violence and smash cars indiscriminately and then walk away patted by senior police officials on the spot. This is shameful.

And now a word about the way the police reacted to the violence. In the heat of the moment, the supervisory officers lost control over their under-command policemen who resorted to aerial firing when pelted with stones. They then fired directly and indiscriminately, not even sparing women. This is to react in sheer panic. First they are supposed to use tear gas, then batons, hitting miscreants on their legs. If some mischief-mongers have weapons, the police are to fire with rubber bullets, intended to be non-lethal. Do the Lahore police have rubber bullets?

Under the Criminal Procedure Code, only the senior-most police officer present is authorised to order fire aimed at a particular individual or group that is endangering the lives of others. That is the last resort. The SP Model Town or DIG operations, being the senior-most police officers, have to answer these basic questions.

However, the ultimate responsibility rests with the chief executive. While he has offered to resign if found responsible for this fiasco by a judicial commission, merely expressing remorse is not enough. He should ensure ruthless accountability of the political, bureaucratic and police chain of command responsible for the unfortunate tragedy.

The writer is a retired police officer.

Published in Dawn, June 22nd, 2014