Pride and professionalism for the police - 26 January 2009

by Rajiva Wijesinha

Amongst the many statements that came out after the horrifying murder of Lasantha Wickramatunga, I was particularly struck by that issued by the Civil Rights Movement of Sri Lanka. CRM started nearly forty years ago, when Human Rights were not fashionable, and it has continued to work without much fanfare or financial inputs, which perhaps helps it to be comparatively objective in its straightforward commitment to Rights.

On this occasion, it made a simple but unarguable point in its heading, when it asserted that police professionalism was needed. Though it quoted from one of the more adversarial statements issued after the event, that of ‘Reporters without Borders’, it omitted the more contentious sections and referred only to government allowing an ‘outrageous level of impunity to develop as regards violence against the press’. CRM, instead of going on in accordance with a political agenda, notes merely the ‘totally unacceptable inefficiency displayed by the police recently in preventing crimes or apprehending criminals’.

This general fact is omitted by those who wish to make political points. One columnist pointed out the number of deaths of politicians in opposition that have gone unsolved, but failed to note that the same applies to the deaths of Lakshman Kadirgamar and Jeyaraj Fernandopulle and D M Dissanayake, and even, to go back in time, Neelan Tiruchelvam and C V Gooneratne.

What is the reason for this? Whilst some failures may be due to politics, and others to a lack of will, there are certainly enough reasons for which the police alone cannot be held responsible. CRM refers to the fact that there is now a larger force, but this very expansion has caused problems because, as senior policemen tell you when discussing current shortcomings, the training period has been shortened to a pitiful span. The old detective course in which so much pride was taken was stopped several years ago, and there has been no concerted effort to develop further training to the extent needed by modern criminal techniques.

Some of this neglect has arisen because of the obviously necessary priority accorded in the last decade to training of the armed forces. Thus, whilst we obviously have a professional armed service, that not only functions effectively, but also does so with full understanding of national and international law, training towards similar professionalism has not been extended to the police, through no fault of its own. The so called Donor Police Support Group, which just drank a lot of tea together some years back, managed only a couple of initiatives.

The success of one of these, the Swedish Project on Scene of Crime Investigation, suggests how the police would benefit from more training, in investigation, interrogation and even prosecution. But, with resources limited, there was no concerted plan in this regard. Meanwhile the police were entrusted with even more tasks, personal security for increasing numbers of possible LTTE targets, along with general security duties all over the country, involving also constant searches for personnel and equipment poised to create mayhem.

But, whilst deficiencies are understandable in the context of additional multifarious responsibilities, they are not acceptable. The core function of the police, crime prevention and detection, cannot be neglected. Particularly now, with the increased need for a multi-ethnic well trained police force in action all over the country, we must address this problem immediately. Leaving aside the simple moral imperative, we should note also the practical ill effects of neglect in this area. If remedial action is not taken, the extraordinary achievements of our armed forces in the North may well be set at naught. Attention to lapses in the rest of the country will dictate international responses to our situation, rather than the congratulations we deserve for having dealt firmly with terrorism whilst fulfilling more effectively than any other fighting force our obligation towards civilians in conflict affected areas.

Indeed, we can see already the confusion that has set in, with assertions that conflate the two issues in a manner that can only offer joy to the LTTE. Six American ambassadors, for instance, who have some knowledge of this country, referred regretfully only to shortcomings with regard to rights in the South, and such interventions we should respect, because they do not in any way imply criticism of our struggle against terrorism. This however gets swept up with other things in more general critiques, which suggest we are somehow to blame with regard to international humanitarian law.

Our response to these should be short and sharp, to make it clear that we know our obligations, and have abided by them and will do so, because we are more concerned about our own citizens than anyone else could be. But at the same time we must make clear our determination to uphold national law, and therefore to fine tune instruments such as the police that ensure the rule of that law. With the forces near to bringing the struggle against terror to a successful conclusion, we should not wait to begin the process of training and administrative streamlining that will ensure a police force that will, as CRM says, restore the ‘pride and professionalism which is still fresh in those of us with longer memories’.

Rajiva Wijesinha

Secretary General

Secretariat for Coordinating the Peace Process