Misrule of law

Politicisation of the police endangers civil liberties

The demonstrable bias in the Delhi Police investigations of the north-east Delhi riots this February underlines the growing politicisation of the police force as an instrument of repression. This is, in fact, a trend across states and ruling regimes. But the Delhi Police come under the Union home ministry and are expected to set the standards in the exercise of its functions. Their recent actions cannot be described as exemplary by any yardstick. The fact that a senior police officer can openly caution subordinates to exercise circumspection in arresting the Hindu youth because of resentment in the community points to the depth of the problem. It is also remarkable that a Muslim activist, Umar Khalid, is arrested in the middle of the night and charged with sedition and murder for participating in protests against the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) and the National Register of Citizens (NRC).

The police have claimed that Mr Khalid “conspired” to provoke the riots and embarrass the government during US President Donald Trump’s visit — although the only evidence of this appears to be two witnesses who have been conveniently unnamed in the charge sheet. This same police force neglected to arrest, let alone file an FIR against, three ruling party leaders, all Hindus, who made incendiary statements that can be construed as incitement to riot by any definition. Bizarrely, the police claim they lack evidence against these leaders. But there are, for instance, any number of TV clips of Kapil Mishra’s provocative words — that too, standing beside a senior police officer — plus evidence of WhatsApp messages drawing inspiration from his statements. Yet, the Delhi police have chosen to pinpoint anti-CAA and -NRC protestors as instigating the riots. Of the 53 people killed in the riots, 38 are Muslim. It is unarguable that these deaths were on account of each victim’s religious identity. But last week, the police filed a voluminous charge sheet against 15 people, 13 of whom are Muslim. It is striking that most of the protestors who were arrested and charged under the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act were students under 30 years, suggesting that the police were targeting the age cohort most likely to participate in anti-government protests. All in all, it is hard to escape the view that the Delhi Police have targeted anti-CAA protestors to make sure that whenever CAA protests are revived, no one will protest with the same intensity. This is further proof that the way in which the police have been politicised in state after state has become one of the central weaknesses of the law and order system.

Disturbingly, the triggers for such responses need not be serious or even seditious within even an ample interpretation of the law. In West Bengal, for instance, a professor was arrested for circulating cartoons of the chief minister. In Bengaluru, a 19-year-old student was arrested for shouting “Pakistan Zindabad” and spent 110 days in prison. The police in Uttar Pradesh have filed a sedition case against Aam Aadmi Party MP Sanjay Singh for discussing a survey that shows that the majority of people in the state find the ruling party casteist. When draconian laws intended to deal with extreme situations are routinely used to suppress dissent, Indian citizens cannot be sure of their constitutional liberties, and the journey from democracy to a police state can be short.