Introduction
The capacity of police
to both prevent and provoke conflict is
increasingly recognized. Although some
policemen have been displaying extraordinary
courage and even sacrificing their lives to
the call of duty, other heinous crimes. The
police force can potentially play a vital
role in providing the much needed security
environment for peaceful social, political
and economic development. A well-resourced,
well-trained, professional and accountable
police is vital to improving the quality
governance and bringing about greater public
trust in the state. On the other hand, a
poorly maintained police force that is also
misused for both partisan politics and
criminal ends will lead to further
deterioration in law and order and internal
security environment. In Pakistan,
unfortunately, citizens grievances against
police brutality, highhandedness and
corruption are fairly common. Given its
colonial tradition, repressive culture and
lack of public trust, the police enjoy
little credibility among the general public.
Not surprisingly, the issue of police
accountability remains a point of concern in
Pakistan, given the excessive powers and
discretion in the hands of police officers.
Accountability is vitally important with
regard to police officers because of their
powers to use coercive force in enforcing
the law. Effective accountability is needed
to transform police behavior, based on a
deep-rooted culture of repression, into a
service-oriented role and to promote mutual
confidence between police and the public.
The success of police requires public
cooperation and support, which is not
possible without credibility and faith in
the police accountability system – that is
still lacking in Pakistan.
In the present
liberal-democratic era, societies all over
the world are engaged in developing and
strengthening mechanisms to monitor and make
pubic service organizations, like the
police, duly accountable. In order to deal
with this most critical aspect of
administrative efficiency, modern societies
have introduced accountability mechanisms
for Police Departments comprising of Public
Safety Commissions, Magisterial/Judicial
institutions and Internal Accountability
controls.
In original scheme of things under the
Police Act 1861, the Police Department
constituted two distinct structures:
inspectorate and actual policing in the
district. The Inspector General was assisted
by several Deputy Inspector Generals (DIGs)
of Police, each assigned a range of 3 to 5
districts. The DIG exercised “a general
supervision over the District
Superintendents in his range, and they were
to look towards him for advice, guidance,
leadership and co-ordination of police work
within the range. As head of the district
police, a District Superintendent was made
responsible for all matters relating to the
internal economy of the force, its
management and the maintenance of its
discipline and the efficient performance of
all its duties connected with the
prevention, investigation and detection of
crime.” This inspectorate system
gradually collapsed after independence as
the police institution became increasingly
centralized.