O P I N I O N S

EDITORIALS

Sikhs on blacklist
Let them face the law
Stopping NRIs from visiting India on the basis of a Union Home Ministry blacklist seems unreasonable. According to newspaper reports, the Centre has blacklisted 169 Sikh hardliners of whom, the Punjab government says, 46 are innocent. If there are Indians abroad wanted for violating the law, then they should be arrested on arrival here and tried in a court of law. Why deny them visas? 

‘VIP’ violators
No one should be let off
What happens all too often did not happen, and it became news. All too often, someone who commits a traffic offence is pulled over by the police. He flashes his ‘VIP’ credentials or calls a ‘VIP friend’ and asks him to intercede on his behalf. The policeman on duty lets him go, and pounces on another hapless person. Life goes on as normal.

Mediation is the key
CJI’s call for a settlement culture timely
Chief Justice of India Justice S.H. Kapadia has rightly stressed the need for replacing the scourge of litigation with a settlement culture through mediation. Inaugurating the National Conference on Mediation in New Delhi recently, he said that if various courts — from the Supreme Court to the subordinate courts — are flooded with cases, it is only because of the absence of settlement culture among the litigants.

• Thought for the Day

ARTICLE

New US strategy in Afghanistan
Fresh challenges before India
by Maj-Gen Ashok Mehta (retd)
Things are going from bad to worse in Afghanistan. The troop surge and military operations in the South and East have failed to regain the initiative from the Taliban as expected. Rather, the Taliban offensive has taken a heavy toll of US and Afghan forces. An overall increase in violence is 87 per cent compared to that last year — a 94 per cent rise in roadside bombings and three suicide bombings a week, including multiple bombers targeting US/NATO bases inflicting the highest casualties in June.

MIDDLE

Scotland, here they come
by Roopinder Singh
In an exclusive off-the-record briefing in which he demanded anonymity because of the sensitive nature of the subject, a senior official of the Punjab government stridently sought to put to rest all speculation regarding the visit of the state’s legislators to the country known for all things scotch. “It is not only desirable but also necessary that state legislators continually educate themselves,” he said.

OPED THE POLICE

The Supreme Court’s slew of directives notwithstanding, the implementation of police reforms has proved to be an uphill task. The Chief Ministers are reluctant to enforce them as they don't want to lose their hold over the police.  How can the police be insulated from political interference and improve governance? An in-depth study
Resistance to reform: Key to better policing
Maja Daruwala
The problem with policing is too well known to be rehashed. More important is the solution. In democracies, the relationship between the police and the political executive is always close. Both are bound in the common enterprise of preventing and investigating crime, maintaining law and order and ensuring that society has a well provisioned, well functioning essential service that protects life, liberty and property.

Cosmetic changes won’t do
Sankar Sen
THE demand for meaningful police reforms in India is an old one. Successive governments created many committees and commissions for nearly three decades. In 1979, the National Police Commission (better known as the Dharam Vira Commission) made a number of practical recommendations for police reforms which are relevant today.

Status of Supreme Court’s directives

EDITORIALS

Sikhs on blacklist
Let them face the law

Stopping NRIs from visiting India on the basis of a Union Home Ministry blacklist seems unreasonable. According to newspaper reports, the Centre has blacklisted 169 Sikh hardliners of whom, the Punjab government says, 46 are innocent. If there are Indians abroad wanted for violating the law, then they should be arrested on arrival here and tried in a court of law. Why deny them visas? There might be some who got misled as youngsters during the days of militancy or were too immature to understand the implications of taking on the might of the state. Now wiser with age and experience, they might want to lead a peaceful life in the country of their birth or visit their homes to meet their near and dear ones.

Since the blacklist has not been officially made public, this has created confusion and fear among Indians abroad. Policemen and Customs officials can harass anyone they think is an undesirable person. Harassing or blackmailing innocents at airports sends a wrong signal about the rule of law in this country. Earlier this year, the Mayor of Slough (UK), Mr Joginder Singh Bal, was sent back from the airport as his name figured on the blacklist. His name was subsequently dropped from the blacklist. There might be others who got similar treatment but their cases never got highlighted. If there are known killers and pro-Khalistan elements who had escaped the law, why stop them from visiting the country? Just arrest them and put them to trial.

The names and photographs of all wanted persons from various states should be put on the official site of the Home Ministry so that they get to know what particular offence they have committed and decide whether they would like to visit India and face trial. Some may like to surrender. Home Minister P. Chidambaram has offered to consider a surrender policy for Kashmiri youth willing to abjure violence. Even the surrendered Naxals have been offered police jobs. Then why deny Sikh extremists or others abroad a chance to return to normal life in India?

‘VIP’ violators
No one should be let off

What happens all too often did not happen, and it became news. All too often, someone who commits a traffic offence is pulled over by the police. He flashes his ‘VIP’ credentials or calls a ‘VIP friend’ and asks him to intercede on his behalf. The policeman on duty lets him go, and pounces on another hapless person. Life goes on as normal. In Fatehgarh Sahib, the police officer in-charge of traffic issued a citation to a Mandi Gobindgarh-based ‘VIP’ who is said to be a close aide of an OSD of a VIP. Now, with that kind of connection, how could the person be hauled up for committing a traffic offence. The officer did his duty. How dare he?

Ah! the malice of impunity that afflicts our VIPs and their kith and kin! The feeling that you can mow down people in your fancy car and get away with it, even kill someone and beat the system; what is a mere traffic offence like not fastening a seat belt? After all, any restraint is infra dig for the ‘VIP’, so what if it is for the safety of the occupants? The ‘VIP’ is above law. In a hierarchy-conscious nation like ours, not only do we have ‘VIPs’ but ‘VIP-relations’, ‘VIP-friends’, friends of OSDs of VIPs, friends of VIPs cooks, and so on. They all bask in the reflected glory of being in the VIPs wake, and need to be pampered accordingly. Thus it comes as no surprise that the officer was transferred and punished, post haste.

The shameful act of interceding on behalf of law breakers should be condemned by all right-thinking citizens. It is disgraceful that people who misbehave so badly in India, turn into model citizens when they go abroad. All that changes is that they realise that they can’t flaunt their ‘VIP’ status and thus they have no excuse for impudent behaviour. They should feel the same in India too. It is high time the law is enforced in right earnest and wrongdoers punished. The police officer concerned should be commended, instead of punished for his action.

Mediation is the key
CJI’s call for a settlement culture timely

Chief Justice of India Justice S.H. Kapadia has rightly stressed the need for replacing the scourge of litigation with a settlement culture through mediation. Inaugurating the National Conference on Mediation in New Delhi recently, he said that if various courts — from the Supreme Court to the subordinate courts — are flooded with cases, it is only because of the absence of settlement culture among the litigants. In many countries, people prefer settlement to litigation and that is why mediation is successful there. Giving a classic example, Justice Kapadia pointed out how for recovering Rs 5, people do not mind spending 15 years in the courts. While the court presents the litigants with a “win-lose” scenario, in mediation, one has to create a “win-win” situation for the contending parties. Undoubtedly, the people do not understand the value of time. Otherwise, what prevents them from opting for or trying out the various methods in the alternative dispute redressal mechanism?

Significantly, many judges of the Supreme Court, who attended the conference, joined the CJI in blaming the lack of out-of-court settlement culture in the country for the rising backlog of disputes and the need for promoting the alternative dispute resolution mechanism to reduce the burden on courts. Justice Altamas Kabir said that though nobody can be blamed for the load of work they (the judges) have, they will have to find a solution to “get out of this mess”. Justice R.V. Raveendran said that space needs to be created in courts to deal with cases which cannot be resolved through mediation, like criminal, election and administrative cases.

For making mediation a success, there is need for effective cooperation between the judiciary, the Bar and the legislature. Unfortunately, the government is the biggest litigant today. Sadly, the Centre and the states continue litigation for litigation sake. They are prepared to file appeals after appeals and fight it out in the court for years but refuse to sympathise with a poor employee and deny him his legitimate dues. In a welfare state, the government should act as the custodian of public weal and not as a stumbling block in the speedy administration of justice. The Manmohan Singh government’s new litigation policy will be of little value if the officials do not change their mindset.

Thought for the Day

If men are to respect each other for what they are, they must cease to respect each other for what they own. — APJ Taylor

ARTICLE

New US strategy in Afghanistan
Fresh challenges before India
by Maj-Gen Ashok Mehta (retd)

Things are going from bad to worse in Afghanistan. The troop surge and military operations in the South and East have failed to regain the initiative from the Taliban as expected. Rather, the Taliban offensive has taken a heavy toll of US and Afghan forces. An overall increase in violence is 87 per cent compared to that last year — a 94 per cent rise in roadside bombings and three suicide bombings a week, including multiple bombers targeting US/NATO bases inflicting the highest casualties in June. Earlier this month was the third case of fratricide since 2008 — a rogue Afghan soldier killing three British Gurkha soldiers and wounding four more. This is bound to adversely affect Afghanisation’s security sector.

The Afghan Rights Monitor (ARM) in its mid-year report has described 2010 as the worst for Afghanistan in terms of insecurity since 2001 and criticised the UN which has been “effectively paralysed in almost 90 per cent of Afghan due to self-paranoia and extreme risk-prevention measures”. If this was not bad enough, Holland, Canada, Poland, Australia and even UK are contemplating withdrawal of troops. “We can’t be there for another five years, having been there for nine years already”, British Prime Minister David Cameron has noted. NATO’s Secretary-General Rasmussen has warned that the Taliban would return to Afghanistan and it would once again become a safe haven for terrorists if international forces withdrew too soon.

President Obama, whose popularity is at a new low, has said that the July deadline is only the start of a transition phase that would allow the Afghan government to take more and more responsibility and not cut and run. Whatever the spin, the mood in America is somber, even pessimistic about the war of necessity which has a diminishing traction though support for the GIs is solid. US Congress is divided — an amendment sponsored by Democrats in the House demanding a detailed withdrawal plan was defeated due to Republican support.

Almost no one on the US think-tank circuit believes that the war can be won. The refrain is about averting defeat. The argument goes that to fight the war, the US has chosen two unreliable partners: President Karzai and Pakistan. It is uselessly spending $100 billion annually and losing 1.7 soldiers a day with no light at the end the tunnel. Afghanistan has become America’s longest military campaign in which more than 1000 soldiers have been killed and 6000 wounded. The talk is about alternative extrication strategies.

I heard a version of the alternate strategy during an international conference earlier this month in New York. It categorically asserted that the war could not be won; that it was a lost cause; that the US should immediately review its strategy keeping modest and attainable goals by scaling down troop levels to 20,000, mostly special forces and holding only key population centres like Kabul. Emphasis was on covert operations, backed by drones and air power. Both President Karzai and the Pakistan military establishment came in for a pasting which no one, including the Afghans and the Pakistanis attending the conference, seemed to mind.

There is little originality in this strategy as it resembles the US Vice-President’s own Biden Plan after his name. The latest incarnation of strategy comes from a former US envoy to India, Robert Blackwill, who recommends a defacto partition of Afghanistan between Pashtun and non-Pashtun areas with US forces concentrated in the non-Pashtun belt while employing Special Forces and the Air Force to target the Taliban leadership in the partitioned Pashtun area and inside Pakistan. Even the Blackwill Plan has shades of the Cofer Black (former CIA and counterterrorism expert) and Peter Galbraith (former Deputy Special Representative for Afghanistan) alternate strategies.

The strategy being executed under the new leadership of Gen David Petraeus — the most over-researched strategy in recent history — is simply not working. Besides unreliable local partners, it suffers from the clarity of mission, inadequacy of resources, insufficiency of political will and a surfeit of cooks spoiling the broth. Nothing is more diverting for troops in combat than the deadlines for thinning out or alterations in the rules of engagement which are proposed by General Petraeus. Despite these deficiencies, American, British and other allied soldiers are fighting with “courageous restraint”, a term introduced by the dismissed Gen Stanley McChrystal for “protecting people”. Further, making President Karzai deliver on better governance and Pakistan on acting against the Afghan Taliban and the Haqqani network is the work in progress but unlikely to succeed.

The exit strategy is premised on a negotiated power-sharing agreement with the reconcilable Afghan Taliban for which president Karzai and US interlocutors have been in contact with elements of the Quetta Shura, courtesy Pakistan’s ISI. One report suggests that General Petraeus has met Mullah Omar and that the Pakistan Army is in the driver’s seat on reconciliation. Ironically, the Pakistan Army has gained notoriety for breaking deals with militant groups in Pakistan and will sell a lemon to the US, anxious to walk into the sunset.

It is impossible to tell how Afghanistan will shape up by December when President Obama will preside over the third review of the Af-Pak strategy. The civilian and military surge is continuing, the delayed operations to clear and hold Kandahar, the intellectual heartland of the Taliban, will have been attempted to commence negotiating with the defeated Taliban from a position of strength. Most Afghans believe the real Taliban will not negotiate when they know that the occupation forces are on the way out. The best case scenario for the US is empowering the Afghan National Security Forces in undertaking independent operations against the Taliban coupled with a credible power-sharing agreement resulting from a national unity government.

The scenario that India dreads is the return of the Taliban in whatever combination of anti-India networks that Pakistan is able to engineer. A nuanced shift has taken place in New Delhi’s Afghanistan policy. It has reconciled with the idea of reintegration of Taliban foot soldiers but rejected reconciliation with its leadership as dangerous. The need of the hour is preventing with the help of regional players a precipitate departure of the US and NATO forces by scuttling Pakistan’s design of foisting the Taliban on Kabul.

Reviving the Northern Alliance, opening channels to the Pashtun groups in Afghanistan and Pakistan, including the Taliban, is an immediate challenge for New Delhi. So also is protecting its 4000 workers and assets in Afghanistan while continuing to gainfully employ its soft power in reconstructing Afghanistan. India’s biggest handicap in pursuing a proactive policy is the lack of contiguity with Afghanistan and US over-reliance on Pakistan to deliver both on counter-insurgency as well as reconciliation with the Taliban. Enlarging military engagement through military training and exchange of police and army officers will ensure that the Afghan military benefits from the Indian Army’s long and sustained counter-insurgency experience. India needs to augment its defence wing in Kabul and improve intelligence-sharing with ISAF and the Afghan military. It could donate one division-worth of military equipment for the Afghan Army. The essence of the challenge is combining hard and soft power for preserving India’s interests while promoting stability in Afghanistan. New Delhi should stop saying that it has no leverage!

MIDDLE

Scotland, here they come
by Roopinder Singh

In an exclusive off-the-record briefing in which he demanded anonymity because of the sensitive nature of the subject, a senior official of the Punjab government stridently sought to put to rest all speculation regarding the visit of the state’s legislators to the country known for all things scotch. “It is not only desirable but also necessary that state legislators continually educate themselves,” he said.

He strongly refuted the allegation that the honourable legislators had gone on a pleasure trip. “This is a serious attempt to examine and understand the process with which scotch whiskey is manufactured”, he said, adding that the team would visit various facilities with a view to drawing lessons which would be of immense help to such endeavours in the state.”

When asked if it was desirable that the public exchequer’s money be used for such trips, the official came back with the following argument: “Look at all the liquor shops in Punjab. Even in Chandigarh you have many shops in a single location, like the Sector 9 market. We need quality products for such up-scale showrooms.”

In response to a pointed question about the honourable members’ dietary excursions, he said that scotch egg was a staple with many members in the morning and scotch pancake’s at tea time. Some members had even tried the scotch pie. He pleaded ignorance about whether the members imbibed the more potent drinks that Scotland is also associated with worldwide.

His PA, who had been hovering unobtrusively in the background, taking notes and doing the things PAs do, however, pointed out that it would be rude to refuse traditional scottish hospitality and the members would be expected to do all they can to further the strong fraternal bonds between the scotch and Indians.

The issue of whether the ground water around Punjabi distilleries was polluted (as claimed initially) or not (as the state pollution control board later said), was dismissed off-hand. “How does it matter? We must be prepared for all challenges, extant or anticipated. Pollution is a global phenomenon and we must go globe-trotting to study it,” the official, who is a figment of this writer’s imagination, said.

Talking of global ramifications, a request has just been received for a high-powered committee to study the designs of the scottish kilt. “There is a remarkable similarity between the tartan design and the Madras check. “It is also not a coincidence that the kilt and the lungi are used to cover the lower part of the male torso. “We must examine if there is any patent violation involved in this, and while doing so we can also explore the possibility of manufacturing scottish kilts in Ludhiana,” said the official.

“Brilliant Sir”, said the PA, “other honourable members who have been complaining of being left out. We can take care of them now”. Scotland, here they come.

OPED THE POLICE

The Supreme Court’s slew of directives notwithstanding, the implementation of police reforms has proved to be an uphill task. The Chief Ministers are reluctant to enforce them as they don't want to lose their hold over the police.  How can the police be insulated from political interference and improve governance? An in-depth study
Resistance to reform: Key to better policing
Maja Daruwala

The problem with policing is too well known to be rehashed. More important is the solution. In democracies, the relationship between the police and the political executive is always close. Both are bound in the common enterprise of preventing and investigating crime, maintaining law and order and ensuring that society has a well provisioned, well functioning essential service that protects life, liberty and property.

The key to better policing lies in defining clearly the roles and responsibilities of the political executive (i.e. the bureaucracy and the people's representatives) and the police and making them know their limits of power.

Those who fear losing their death grip over the police sometimes deliberately like to create the impression that any rein on the unfettered exercise of will over the police will create an entirely independent and out of control police force. Ironically though, today's dysfunctional police-executive relationship has given us a force with very few limits on its power.

There is no question but that the political executive must always be paramount. But the relationship has to be symbiotic, not parasitic or dependent.

A suggested model for defining this relationship would read: “Responsibilities and independence of State Police Chief”

The supervision, direction and control of the police throughout the state shall, be vested in an officer of the rank of Director General of Police (DGP) designated as the state police chief.

n The DGP shall be responsible to the Minister for

i) carrying out the functions and duties of the police;

ii) the general conduct of the police;

iii) the effective, efficient and economical management of the police;

iv) tendering advice to the Minister;

v) giving effect to any lawful ministerial directions.

n The DGP shall not be not responsible to, and must act independently of, the Minister regarding:

i) the maintenance of order in relation to any individual or group of individuals; and

ii) the enforcement of the law in relation to any individual or group of individuals; and

iii) the investigation and prosecution of offences; and

iv) decisions about individual police officers.

n The Minister may give the DGP directions on matters of government policy that relate to

i) prevention of crime;

ii) maintenance of public safety and public order;

iii) delivery of police services; and

iv) general areas of law enforcement.

n No direction from the Minister to the DGP may have the effect of requiring the non-enforcement of a particular area of law

n The Minister must not give directions to the DGP in relation to the following:

i) enforcement of the criminal law in particular cases and classes of cases

ii) matters that relate to an individual or group of individuals

iii) decisions on individual members of the police

n If there is dispute between the Minister and the DGP in relation to any direction under this section, the Minister must, as soon as practicable after the dispute arises,

i) provide that direction to the DGP in writing; and

ii) publish a copy in the gazette; and

iii) present a copy to the legislature

True, present Acts are hazy about how the police is to be 'supervised' and seemingly do not explicitly condition the political executive's powers. But underlying police manuals specify exactly how and by whom administrative powers will be exercised. Similarly, there is clear law that prohibits any interference in police investigations from any quarter. But all this is observed in the breach.

Judicious supervision has degenerated into bossism and the power to transfer, appoint, promote or suspend police officers is too often used as punishment and reward to bend the police until today 'control and supervision' has become something entirely different from what was originally intended.

Nevertheless, willy-nilly we are in the era of police reforms. After 30-odd years, the National Police Commission's recommendations have been dusted off. Multiple committees have spent endless hours culling out priorities. Under the chairmanship of Soli Sorabjee, the Ministry of Home Affairs has drawn up a brand new Model Police Bill for the benefit of lawmakers across the country. Civil society has polished it and is begging policy makers to pay attention.

Union Law Minister Veerappa Moily's Administrative Reforms Commission has added more suggestions to change the police force into a reliable and trusted police service. The ruling party's manifesto has recognised "the imperative of police reforms" and said "a clear distinction between the political executive and police administration will be made."

Even the Supreme Court has spoken and laid out a road map for reform. Its directions came nearly five years ago. Since then, every government has avoided compliance. Some have gone through the motions change while going about business as usual on the ground. Others have created stunted institutions designed to defeat intention. Yet others have legislated their way out from under the weight of obedience. And some have simply done nothing at all.

Meanwhile, everyday, in the absence of honest and law abiding policing, the security situation for country and individual is worsening. At the root of rotten policing lies the degree to which raw political power has been able to gain control over it. Weak leaderships have bowed low before illegitimate interference in the everyday running of the force and allowed informal but powerful influences to gain a large footprint in all police work. If policing is ever to improve this has to be rectified. The solutions are there. We need the political will.

The writer is Director, Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative, New Delhi

Cosmetic changes won’t do
Sankar Sen

THE demand for meaningful police reforms in India is an old one. Successive governments created many committees and commissions for nearly three decades. In 1979, the National Police Commission (better known as the Dharam Vira Commission) made a number of practical recommendations for police reforms which are relevant today.

In 1996, two former DGPs filed a PIL before the Supreme Court asking the court to direct the states to implement the Dharam Vira Report. But after a decade, the Supreme Court had given clear directives to the Centre and the states to implement the core reforms recommended by the NPC to insulate the police from extraneous pressures and influence. Despite these unambiguous orders, the state governments are dragging feet and betraying unwillingness to lose their stranglehold over the police.

The majority of the states have said that they support the spirit of reforms but objected to many of the directives of the court. Initially, the states, one after another, filed petitions in the Supreme Court asking for more time to implement the directives. On January 11, 2007, the Supreme Court considered the objections and concerns of the states, but said firmly that the process of police reforms must commence immediately. Unfortunately, the process of implementation of police reforms is still not visible in most states.

States like Gujarat, Nagaland, Uttar Pradesh, Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh have questioned the raison d' etre of State Security Commissions. They have brazenly stated that no unwarranted influence is at all exercised over the state police. They have also expressed the view that setting up a State Security Commission with binding powers will lead to the creation of a parallel body which is not accountable to the people of the states.

Further, a fixed two-year tenure for DGP, irrespective of the superannuation date, will block opportunities for promotion of other senior eligible officers who will feel demoralised. Most states have not also complied with the directives of the Supreme Court regarding the establishment of independent Police Complaints Authority at the state and district levels to look into public complaints against police misconduct. The state governments' stand is that the establishment of PCA will demoralise the police personnel and adversely affect their working.

The Soli Sorabjee Committee submitted its draft report to the government on October 31, 2006. But no meaningful steps have been taken so far by the Centre to enact a new law for the police in the Union Territories.

Many states have enacted new police Acts. A number of them have submitted in the Supreme Court that they are in the process of framing new police laws. On the surface, they appear encouraging. But a reality check on the ground will reveal that what is being attempted in many states is contrary to the spirit of instructions issued by the Supreme Court.

The new police Acts that have been passed and the Bills that have been readied have diluted the core systemic reforms stipulated by the Supreme Court. Some states have set up State Security Commissions and packed them with yes men and excluded the Leader of the Opposition. To retain political control over the police, they have made some cosmetic changes and not meaningful systemic reforms.

A three-member Monitoring Committee was set up by the Supreme Court with Justice K.T. Thomas, a former Supreme Court Judge, as its chairperson. It is mandated to examine the affidavits filed by the states. It will also examine the new police Acts passed by the states after the Supreme Court judgment of 2006 and find out if the Acts are in keeping with the letter and spirit of the apex court's directives.

The committee has not yet submitted its final report. Thus, meaningful police reforms in the country are stalled. But the reforms brook no delay. The country needs an apolitical, efficient and revamped police force to take on the forces of disruption and destabilisation. Tomorrow will be too late.

The writer, a former Director-General, National Human Rights Commission, is Senior Fellow, Institute of Social Sciences, New Delhi

Status of Supreme Court’s directives

n Not a single state has managed to fulfil all the criteria prescribed by the Supreme Court with regard to the State Security Commission (SSCs). Most states have set up SSCs that do not reflect the court's criteria with regard to the composition, function and powers. States such as Tamil Nadu, Orissa, Madhya Pradesh, Jammu and Kashmir and Andhra Pradesh are in complete non-compliance with this directive.

n Arunachal Pradesh, Meghalaya, Mizoram and Nagaland are the only states that have adopted the court's prescribed criteria with regard to the selection, tenure and removal of the Director-General of Police. A few states have only partially incorporated these criteria whilst several states such as Karnataka, Jharkhand, Haryana, Kerala and Andhra Pradesh are not compliant with this directive.

n Andhra Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh and the north-eastern states of Arunachal Pradesh, Meghalaya, Manipur, Mizoram and Nagaland are in full compliance with this directive which provides for a fixed tenure for officers on operational duties. While a few states have partially satisfied the criteria set by the Supreme Court, it is notable that the majority are not in compliance with this directive.

n Several states such as Assam, Arunachal Pradesh, Haryana, Himachal Pradesh, Karnataka and Sikkim have complied with the Supreme Court's directive to separate the law and order police with the investigation police. However, a majority of states have not fully implemented this directive.

n Most states have established a Police Establishment Board, but only Arunachal Pradesh and Goa are in full compliance with all the court's stipulated criteria in this regard. In contrast, Bihar is the only state which has taken no steps towards complying with this directive.

n No state government has established Police Complaints Authorities at both district and state level that fully comply with the Supreme Court's orders. Many states have established Authorities which only partially comply with the court's directive in terms of the composition, mandate and powers.

Many states — Uttar Pradesh, Tamil Nadu, Punjab, Mizoram, Madhya Pradesh, Karnataka, Jammu and Kashmir and Andhra Pradesh have completely ignored this directive.