The Police Order of 2002 establishes a complete legislative framework for the organisation, functions, and accountability of Pakistan’s police forces. It was implemented to modernise policing in the country, increase openness, and improve the performance of law enforcement organisations. Given the intricacy and depth necessary to discuss this issue in 3000 words, I’ll break it down into important components and offer a full explanation.
Historical Background
Before delving into the intricacies of Police Order 2002, it is critical to understand the historical backdrop that led to its adoption. The Police Act of 1861 served as the foundation for policing in Pakistan, as it did in many former British colonies. This Act was enacted during the colonial period to retain control over the local populace, rather than to offer a public service. Over time, this system grew obsolete and more incapable of dealing with contemporary concerns like as organised crime, terrorism, and corruption.
2. Need for Reform
By the late twentieth century, it had become clear that the existing police system was insufficient. The system suffered from a number of challenges, including:
Political interference: The police were frequently exploited as a weapon for political gain, resulting in a loss of public confidence.
Corruption: There was widespread corruption throughout the police force, which hampered justice.
Inefficiency: The police was frequently chastised for its inefficiency in investigating crimes and preserving public order.
Lack of accountability: There was little to no responsibility for police misbehaviour, resulting in an environment of impunity.
Key Features of Police Order 2002
a. Establishment of a Depoliticized Police Force
One of the central aims of the Police Order 2002 was to create a depoliticized police force. This was achieved by ensuring that police appointments, transfers, and promotions were based on merit rather than political connections. The order introduced mechanisms to shield police officers from undue political influence, thereby promoting professionalism within the force.
Separation of Investigative and Monitoring Functions
The Police Order of 2002 ordered the separation of the police’s investigation and watch tasks. Historically, the same police were in charge of both law enforcement and criminal investigations, which frequently resulted in conflicts of interest and inefficiencies. By dividing these tasks, the directive attempted to improve the efficacy of criminal investigations and guarantee that law enforcement actions were carried out impartially.
Establishment of Public Safety Commissions
To strengthen accountability and public scrutiny of police, the order established Public Safety Commissions at the local, provincial, and national levels. These commissions were entrusted for monitoring the police force’s actions, responding to public complaints, and ensuring that the police followed the law.
Creation of Police Complaints Authorities
To address issues of police misconduct, the order established independent Police Complaints Authorities. These authorities were given the mandate to investigate complaints against police officers, including allegations of corruption, abuse of power, and human rights violations. This was a significant step towards ensuring accountability within the police force.
e. Introduction of the Office of the Ombudsman
The Police Order 2002 also provided for the establishment of an Ombudsman for police accountability. The Ombudsman was empowered to investigate complaints against the police, recommend disciplinary actions, and ensure that the rights of citizens were protected.
f. Modernization of Policing Techniques
Recognizing the need for modern policing techniques, the order emphasized the importance of training and capacity-building for police officers. It also encouraged the use of modern technology in crime prevention, investigation, and law enforcement.
The Police Order 2002 establishes the structure of the force, including the position of Provincial Police Officer (PPO).
The PPO is the leader of a province’s police force and is in charge of its general command, control, and administration. The provincial government consults with the National Public Safety Commission while appointing the PPO.
Capital City Police Officer (CCPO)
In major cities, a Capital City Police Officer (CCPO) is appointed to head the police force. The CCPO is responsible for maintaining law and order, preventing and detecting crime, and ensuring the safety of citizens in the city.
c. District Police Officer (DPO)
At the district level, the District Police Officer (DPO) is responsible for policing. The DPO is the key figure in maintaining law and order within the district, implementing policies, and overseeing the work of police officers.
d. Station House Officer (SHO)
The SHO is in charge of a police station and is responsible for enforcing law and order within the jurisdiction of the police station. The SHO plays a crucial role in maintaining public safety and responding to incidents within the community.
Challenges and Criticisms of the Police Order 2002
Despite its broad scope, the Police Order of 2002 encountered significant problems throughout its implementation. Some of the important problems are:
a. Resistance to change.
The police force, being an established institution, resisted the modifications imposed by the decree. Many policemen were used to the previous system and were hesitant to change to the new regulations and procedures.
b. Political interference.
Although the order aimed to depoliticize the police, political interference remained a significant issue. Politicians often sought to influence police appointments and transfers, undermining the merit-based system envisioned by the order.
c. Lack of Resources
The effective implementation of Police Order 2002 required significant resources, including funds for training, technology, and infrastructure. However, in many cases, the necessary resources were not made available, hampering the effectiveness of the reforms.
d. Inadequate Public Awareness
For the reforms to be successful, it was essential that the public understood their rights and the mechanisms available to them for addressing police misconduct. However, public awareness campaigns were limited, leading to a lack of engagement with the new accountability structures.
e. Inconsistent Implementation Across Provinces
The federal nature of Pakistan’s political system meant that the implementation of the Police Order 2002 varied across provinces. Some provinces were more committed to the reforms than others, leading to inconsistencies in how the order was applied.
6. Impact of Police Order 2002
Despite the limitations, the Police Order of 2002 had a tremendous influence on Pakistani police. Some of the important results are:
a. Improved accountability.
The formation of Public Safety Commissions, Police Complaints Authorities, and the Office of the Ombudsman brought additional layers of responsibility to the police force. While these processes were not always completely effective, they constituted a significant step towards ensuring that police were accountable to the people.
Enhanced Professionalism
By emphasizing merit-based appointments and the separation of functions, the order contributed to a more professional police force. Police officers were increasingly recognized for their expertise rather than their political connections.
c. Public Trust
While public trust in the police remains a challenge, the reforms introduced by Police Order 2002 helped to create a foundation for a more transparent and trustworthy policing system. Over time, as the reforms were implemented more consistently, public perception of the police began to improve.
7. Amendments and Subsequent Developments
Since its enactment, Police Order 2002 has been subject to several amendments and revisions. These changes have been driven by both political considerations and practical challenges in implementing the original order. Some key amendments include:
a. Police Order (Amendment) Ordinance 2004
This amendment made several changes to the original order, including adjustments to the powers of the Public Safety Commissions and the roles of various police officers. The amendment was controversial, with critics arguing that it diluted some of the accountability mechanisms introduced by the original order.
b. Police Order (Amendment) Act 2011
The 2011 amendment further revised the structure and functions of the police, particularly in relation to the role of provincial governments in overseeing the police force. This amendment aimed to address some of the practical challenges that had arisen in the years since the original order was enacted.
Conclusion
The Police Order of 2002 marks a substantial attempt to reform and modernise Pakistani policing. The directive aimed to build a more effective and trustworthy police force by instituting new accountability procedures, emphasising merit-based appointments, and distinguishing between law enforcement and investigative tasks. While the order’s execution has met problems such as internal police opposition, political intervention, and budget restrictions, it has had a long-term influence on the country’s policing. The changes enacted by Police Order 2002 paved the way for a more professional and responsible police force, and its sustained development and execution will be critical in tackling Pakistan’s developing law enforcement concerns.