|
December
25, 2000
|
|
Looking
Glass
|
Crime
prevention week essential for police image
The
advertisements are everywhere. Prominent, startling and provocative.
The cocky young man, the scared woman and the by now familiar logo,
Mumbai Police Crime Prevention Week. Its a good
move, and conducted for once in an atypically flamboyant fashion.
The debates with prominent citizens, the publicity blitz, the words:
You are not alone in your fight, The Mumbai Police is
with you. All of it is long overdue. But will it work?
Mumbais
police force has always prided itself on being compared to Scotland
Yard. The fact that we live in one of the safest cities in the country
also implies that it has got something right. And yet, it has problems.
Serious problems.
Some
years ago I volunteered to write a feature on what it was like to
spend 24 hours at a police station. Everyone I knew was apprehensive
when I mentioned it. The irony was obvious and would have been funny
if it wasnt sad. But the fact (that led to the idea of the
feature coming up in the first place) was that a police station,
the place that should logically have been the most secure in the
city was considered by most people, the most unsafe. Why? Talk to
someone who has had to visit a police station in connection with
a burglary, an accident or a dispute, and chances are that he will
be angry. Angry because he would have had to wait, to fight or use
influence to get his complaint attended to and often the response
that resulted was too little and too late.
The
reaction is based on other factors as well. What is the picture
of the cop in the eyes of the average Mumbaikar? He is the man who
kicks street urchins and takes hafta from prostitutes. He is the
man who pockets a bribe when you commit a traffic offence, he is
the man who could demand a cut when he retrieves your stolen goods.
And that is so far as daily interaction goes.
During
the 1992-3 riots when people were being killed and houses burnt
the police were shown to have played a partisan role. And anyone
who has talked to gangsters in the underworld would have been told
stories of police complicity. It is one thing for senior police
officers to condemn the popular cinema for portraying policemen
in a bad light, the fact is the picture put across mirrors public
experience and suppressing it will not alter perceptions.
But
what of the public? Can an institution like the police force be
perceived in isolation? Doesnt its situation reflect the general
rot in society whether it is in attitudes to corruption or sectarianism?
There is no denying that fact.
Society
in general has been responsible in two ways. One is neglect. We
do not care enough that police stations are dreary dingy places
with inadequate facilities. Or that the police force is burdened
with unimaginably hard duties and pressures. Nor do we spare much
thought for the swords that hang over effective policemen wielded
by vested interests and even by criminals.
Y C Pawar, one of the citys most respected cops was hounded
in ingenuous ways by the gangsters he acted against. Equally significant
is the fact that people are willing to break the law and bribe their
way out with money or influential contacts.
In
the circumstances the current initiative is a remarkably progressive
one. If the police and the public can be brought together it is
likely to foster greater sympathy and understanding of the common
problems that beset the two. It would also go some way in removing
the stigma attached to the police and bring about a measure of trust.
But any real gain can only come from substantive change. Without
that negative perceptions of the police will continue to prevail
leaving the public relations exercise with nothing but minor, temporary
benefits.
|