Star
Law history
Agency
of criminal justice system: A historical review
Sheikh
Hafizur Rahman Karzon
The
history of organised police system is not a story of far
back. It developed hand in hand with the development of
urbanisation and industrialisation. Theoretically the
police system is said to have originated for the well-being
of the commoners, but in depth studies revealed that police,
as a regimented force, always safeguards the interests
of upper echelon of society. The corruption of police
is not normal phenomenon of the third world countries,
once Edwin H Sutherland, famous sociologist, wrote 'politician-police-criminal'
triumvirate were operative in the American states. The
history of police in Bangladesh is inextricably related
to the history of the police system of Indian sub-continent.
In this write-up I try to focus the origin, and character
of police in Bangladesh.
History
of Police System in Indian Sub-Continent and Bangladesh
Police was prevalent in the ancient India. In old epics
like Ramayana and Mahabharata there are references as
to the existence of police organisation. Manu said that
people having good knowledge of local area should be appointed
as police, who will better administer law and order situation.
In India there were two different systems of police, one
for rural areas, another for urban areas. During Maurya
Gupta and Mughal period the duality of police system continued.
Imperial powers did not take the direct responsibility
of the rural areas to ensure law and order situation there.
The local landowner or the village headman was entrusted
to keep the village order. Theoretically they were made
accountable to subordinate officers of the empire, but
the authority was not effectively practised.
The
imperial governments had strong police system in cities
where Kotwal was the head of the police administration.
Although Kotwal started working from the Mauryan time,
but description of their activities during Mughal period
is available. During the Mughal period crime and disorder
were kept under the control by the Village PanChayates.
The urban centres had their own police set-up called the
Kotwali system that functioned till the 19th century.
Kotwal had to dispose of many fuctions of the modern police.
Kotwal was to maintain night patrolling, serveillance
over visitors, spies, and migrants, to arrest criminals,
to see the prisons, and to eliminate prostitution and
consumption of alcohol. The post of Kotwal was so powerful
that it created wide opportunity to abuse power and take
bribery. The Kotwal was pictured as oppressive, ruthless
and arbitrary. It reminds typical character of police
as being oppressive, which was so before 500 years ago
and still it is the characteristic trait of police.
In
addition to crime control and maintenance of order, Kotwal
was chief intelligence officer of the monarch. As king's
principal spy Kotwal held enormous power and when exercising
the power arbitrarily tortured common people of different
strata. This torture was the first legacy of police.
After
coming to India and getting administrative power, British
rulers were interested in collecting land revenue, and
for that purpose started setting up police organisations.
Crime control and maintenance of order was not the foremost
task of police, their most important obligation was to
help the revenue authorities to collect land revenue .
For that reason police was controlled by the revenue authorities
and functioned till today under the authority of Collector
in the districts. When extracting land revenue police
widely practised torture. Thus torture became second legacy
of police as an official practice.
The
British Governor of Madras appointed a Torture Commission
in 1854 and entrusted to look into the aggravated danger
of torture and recommend ways how to eliminate it. As
a result of the recommendations, torture by revenue officials
diminished and gradually went away. The Commission was
very spectacular in that it recommended to separate revenue
and police functions, to make third degree (police torture)
a criminal offence and to make a confessional statement
to a police officer totally inadmissible as evidence.
In spite of the recommendations of far reaching changes,
police torture did not wither away. In addition to legacies
of history, the excessive criminality of the 18th and
19th centuries seemed to have made torture inevitable
part of the police culture of Indian sub-continent.
The
East India Company did not touch the existing police system
up to 1792. Lord Cornwallis introduced a new police system
in 1792 responsible to the Company. Under the dispensation
of the new system a post of Darogha was created in every
district and he was made responsible to the District Judge.
Daroghas were entrusted to see the landowners and headmen
policing the villages. Darogha system failed to supervise
the village police and it was abrogated in the three presidencies,
Calcutta, Bombay and Madras, in 1814. This time indigenous
village police system was reintroduced. Under the new
system Collectors were made responsible for the law and
order situation of the districts. In spite of the abolition
of Darogha system the situation did not improve, rather
the situation became chaotic gave rise to dacoity and
insecurity of the citizens.
Charles
Napier conquered Sindh in 1843. Following the Royal Irish
constabulary as model he introduced a separate police
organisation directed by its own officers. An Inspector
General of Police was the chief of the whole province
with a Superintendent of police in each district. Government
had the responsibility of law and order through its Collectors,
but police administration was entrusted to a new and specific
department. The model was later on introduced in other
provinces and it provides the basic structure of police
in Bangladesh and India.
Before
1857 this was the situation of police system in this sub-continent.
After the great mutiny of 1857 the British Crown directly
took the responsibility of India in 1858. The British
rulers were bewildered at the wide-spread mutiny in 1857
in all over India. After controlling the mutiny they thought
to reorganise the whole criminal justice system of Indian
sub-continent. The British rulers enacted the Indian Penal
Code in 1860 and the Criminal Procedure Code in 1861.
With this two criminal Codes in their hands they, then,
required a Police Code for the execution of the criminal
law. The government appointed a Police Commission in 1860
and when implementing the recommendations of the Commission
the government enacted the Police Act, 1861.
The
organisation of police was established according to the
provisions of this Act, which continues to regulate the
police functions still today in Bangladesh, India and
Pakistan.
Immediately
after establishing police, British rulers realised that
successive enquiries found the police incompetent, high-handed,
and corrupt. In 1902, just about 40 years later, the Fraser
Commission concluded that, the police system established
by the British rulers had completely failed. It recorded
that, "Everywhere they went, the Commission heard
the most bitter complaints against the corruption of the
police. These complaints were not made by non-officials
only, but also by officials of all classes including Magistrates
and Police Officers, both European and native." One
may be surprised by seeing that even today after more
than 100 years later corruption and police still go hand
in hand!
In
spite of lot of criticism, alternative of police system
is yet to be discovered. Though many pre-literate societies
have existed without any formal police system, but it
is an important agency of criminal justice system of any
country having urban centres. It operates with a broad
mandate of crime control and maintenance of order. The
existing police system of Bangladesh should be vivisected
for recasting a better law and order-maintaining agency
suited with the needs of 21st century.
The
author is a Lecturer, Department of Law, Dhaka University.
Photo:
AFP
