Effective and impartial police institution is recognized as a major contributing factor for a successful democratic polity. Civilian police is the ultimate responsible agency to ensure civilian security, maintain law and order, promote rule of law and human rights, sustain political stability, and for crime prevention and investigation in a functional democracy. In this context, sustainability of democratic system also relies on effectiveness and credibility of police, and public's unhindered access to it.Police must be an integral part of the society, and should carry out its legitimate responsibilities with public support and participation. Traditionally, police institutions were created to serve and protect the interests of power-holders, and mobilized accordingly. Moreover, the authoritarian and dictatorial regimes have often used police institutions to suppress public aspirations. However, policing in 21st century must be responsible, accountable, transparent and competent to carry out its legally required duties. Therefore, police services should be pro-public and subsequently accountable to the people and country's laws rather than power-holders.
Composition and structure of police institutions throughout the world are different, depending on individual political systems. However, majority of democratic countries have acknowledged civilian police as an essential institution and established it as an independent and autonomous organization. Such an institution helps keep policing functions free of political and illegal interference, and offers opportunity for police to use its intelligence and conscience without interference. In addition, it provides legal responsibility and accountability to the police, which allow police officials to carry out their legal duties within the bounds of fairness and due process.
While reviewing police institutions and their structures in 25 federal countries, three types of institutions are found, all based on principles of cooperation, non-interference and power sharing. First, the United States provides policing mandate to the State and the City, and policing is done under the jurisdiction of the State Governors or City Mayors. While the federal police institution does not exist in the US, the Department of Justice (Justice Ministry) acts as oversight body for all levels of policing. Second, countries like Canada, Belgium, Australia, and the United Kingdom have established three tiers of police institutions: federal, provincial and local (community).
In these countries, the powers related to policy-making, international relations and coordination, and investigation of serious crimes fall under the jurisdiction of the federal police, but the operational responsibilities, including maintenance of law and order, day-to-day crime handling and community relations are provided to either provincial or local police, or both within the limitation of jurisdictions. Third, India and some countries from developing world have established two levels of police: federal and provincial. Even though there is a separation of power in these countries, the chain-of-command and major decision-making powers including policy and operations are controlled by the federal police, and thereby, federal government.
In Nepal, the primary objective of the police (Nepal Police) is to provide security to the people, maintain law and order, and carry out crime prevention and investigation. Since its inception in 1955, it is functioning as a centralized agency because of the country's unitary political system. In addition, it functions under the jurisdictions of the Ministry of Home Affairs, which does not meet internationally accepted standard of independent and autonomous institution. Unfortunately, Nepal Police is often used as a tool of the state and mobilized to suppress the aspirations of people calling for democracy, freedom and civil liberties. However, police has always supported political changes, and fulfilled its legal duty for the stability of new regime and for maintenance of public order.
As Nepal moves to federalism through the 2015 September constitution, there are things that can be done to ensure smooth transformation of administrative and security mechanisms. Transformation process should be designed while recognizing increased role of local community and rapid decision-making process regarding law-enforcement. In addition, it should accept the principles of decentralization and local ownership over security agencies, aiming to promote and empower local community within the concept of civilian control and public accountability. While transforming police, the government should coordinate with other security agencies, including Nepal Army, Armed Police Force and Intelligence Department to develop common understanding on security and federalism.
It is extremely important to balance political and strategic challenges during the period of adapting Nepal Police to federal structure as per the spirit of new constitution. The constitution has envisioned two tiers of policing: federal and provincial. But the municipalities are also allowed to establish City Police for limited purpose. While restructuring the police, separation of powers between federal and provinces and respect for jurisdictions of each other could be instrumental for smooth transition. Other key issues of policing include professional uniformity and integrity, command control, management of human resources and logistics.
Efforts of transformation should also consider current institutional organogram, and existing human resources, financial constraints and infrastructures, which will help create functional policing institutions at all levels. In short term, management of human resources, ranks, logistics and physical space could be challenging. Other major long-term challenges include maintenance of professional integrity and independence; creation of functional police, assurance of equal access of opportunities, promotion and transfer; information and intelligence sharing; access to database and archives; command control; inter-provincial coordination and collaboration; and recruitment and training.
Federalism means maximum devolution of powers to provincial and local government with autonomy and self-governance. As other government entities, federal unit of the Nepal Police must limit its role in policy-making, oversight and coordination that includes development of policy guidelines, designing of training course and curriculums, confidence building between provinces, resource generation and distribution, infrastructure building, adoption of better technologies, overall international border management, as well as maintenance of international relation and liaison with the United Nations, INTERPOL and other intergovernmental agencies.
However, operational mandates should be with provinces and the federal police should not interfere in provincial jurisdictions unless requested or required. It means that provincial police will be responsible for most important duties of the police including law and order, public security and law enforcement, adjacent international border, as well as prevention and investigation of day-to-day crimes. However, serious crimes, including money laundering, organized and transnational crimes, cross-border crimes, drug and human trafficking can be looked at by the federal police in the beginning, even though the constitution does not spell out its proper role in federal structure. But serious crimes are dealt by separate entities as independent federal institution such as Federal Bureau of Investigation in the US, which is also designated as preventive and strategic institution for federal government.
Similarly, transformation of police should be consistent with the National Security Strategy, which is under consideration. It is supposed to identify security challenges and priorities, and the security mechanisms of the country should be mobilized in line with these strategies. Similarly, it is an opportunity to introduce a fresh legislation regarding Nepal Police, which is compelled to function under an outdated law, 1955 Nepal Police Act. As a result, it is continuously facing political interference. In this context, the restructuring and transformation efforts should be conducted through introduction of new legislations, but not through amendment of regulation.
Successful implementation of federalism depends on smooth restructuring and transformation of security institutions, particularly Nepal Police. While security matters are sensitive, the government should address political, administrative and financial challenges while transforming policing institution. Even though the government is ultimately responsible for making the police adapt to federalism, it is also essential to develop political understanding among major political stakeholders and ensure police ownership while designing and materializing transformation. Otherwise, without adequate cooperation of political entities and police leadership transformation of police institution can be jeopardized.
The author is conflict resolution and security specialist
peace.sb@gmail.com
Related story
Heart to Heart with Malvika
