GOA POLICE BILL 2008 HAS DEFECTS AND ALSO UNDERMINES CIVIL LIBERTIES

PANJIM: The Goa Police Bill 2008, in its present form, has several defects as it undermines civil liberties and gives additional powers to the police without ensuring the required accountability. That is why any move to pass the bill without public consultations, needs to be resisted and opposed by the people, civil society and media at large.

This was the consensus of a seminar on the Goa Police Bill 2008 held on Saturday by the Asha Family Responsibilities and Rights Association and the Council for Social Justice and Peace (CSJP).

Addressing a press conference, CSJP executive secretary Fr Maverick Fernandes said there was a need for wider consultation on the bill as it would deeply impact the lives of the residents of Goa who have not been consulted and have no voice with the select committee that is scrutinizing the bill.

A joint press release said, "No public meetings have been held by the committee, unlike Kerala, which instituted a broad-based public consultations. The legislative process has to be more transparent. The bill should have gone through a participatory and collective process, with full participation of the community and civil society organizations as policing is a matter that influences each and every person living in the state."

The organizations highlighted several defects in the bill. First of all, they said the bill had no check on political interference. Stating that the bill suffers from a weak state security commission (SSC), the organizations said that the constitution of the commission was strongly in favour of the government which would make it impossible for the commission to act as a buffer body between the police and politicians and ensure functional autonomy for the police. In the form advocated by the bill, the SSC is likely to perpetuate political interference in police work, the organizations said.

Secondly, as against the Supreme Court directive, there is no security of tenure for officers who can be removed for "administrative exigencies" which is an euphemism for politically motivated transfers. No security of tenure will hamper effective and impartial functioning. The bill's silence on selection and removal criteria for the DGP raises doubts as it creates an obstruction to his/her functioning independently.

Thirdly, the organizations pointed out that the special security zones are a license to violate civil liberties and fundamental rights of groups voicing dissent. The law can easily be made applicable in villages protesting against mining, SEZs and other issues to curb their protests.

Fr Fernandes also pointed out that the "special police forces" implemented in Punjab and Chandigarh has had serious problems with civil liberties. "Why have a provision that had already proven to be harmful in other states?" Fr Fernandes asked, adding that the bill is also prejudiced towards and can be used to harass innocent persons of minority community and weaker sections of society.

Fr Fernandes said, "While the bill is coming in response to directives of the Supreme Court to usher reforms, lack of transparency over the working of the select committee could end up having the opposite effect. The Bill must not be rushed through or passed before considering people's opinions." (TNN)