01-05-2007, 01:25 AM
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->No to police reforms: Gujarat
Pioneer News Service | New Delhi
...as it comes under the purview of State list
Gujarat has joined a host of States which have strongly opposed the much touted police reforms proposed by the Supreme Court.
The Narendra Modi Government expressed its inability to abide by the court's directions since it impinges the Constitutional scheme providing "police" and "public order" as essentially State subjects.
The court had sought all States and Union territories to abide by a slew of proposals suggested as part of reforming the police machinery. As part of this effort, the States had to set up Security Commissions to check any unwarranted influence or pressure by any authority on the police force. Besides, a Police Establishment Board and a Police Complaints Authority were to be set up.
The investigation of crime was separated from the law and order functions and fixed minimum terms of two years was proposed for Director General of Police, Inspector General and other top officers.
The Centre which filed its response on Thursday indicated its willingness to proceed with the directions given by court seeking three months time to finalise the process.
Seeking reconsideration of court's decision of September 2006, the Gujarat Government cited several reasons for its inability to carry out the proposed measures.
"Multiplicity of disciplinary authorities would result in delays and subjectivity at various levels would result in conflicting decisions" the State said. On setting up of State Security Commission, it indicated that such measure "is likely to undermine the jurisdiction and power of a constitutionally established Government in a State and would work as a parallel body, which is not answerable or accountable to the people of the state."
<b>Regarding fixing of minimum tenure for DGPs the government felt that meritorious officers could be deprived of timely promotions. On separation of investigation, the government felt that the police force responsible for law and order alone could be better equipped to investigate criminal activities. </b>
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Pioneer News Service | New Delhi
...as it comes under the purview of State list
Gujarat has joined a host of States which have strongly opposed the much touted police reforms proposed by the Supreme Court.
The Narendra Modi Government expressed its inability to abide by the court's directions since it impinges the Constitutional scheme providing "police" and "public order" as essentially State subjects.
The court had sought all States and Union territories to abide by a slew of proposals suggested as part of reforming the police machinery. As part of this effort, the States had to set up Security Commissions to check any unwarranted influence or pressure by any authority on the police force. Besides, a Police Establishment Board and a Police Complaints Authority were to be set up.
The investigation of crime was separated from the law and order functions and fixed minimum terms of two years was proposed for Director General of Police, Inspector General and other top officers.
The Centre which filed its response on Thursday indicated its willingness to proceed with the directions given by court seeking three months time to finalise the process.
Seeking reconsideration of court's decision of September 2006, the Gujarat Government cited several reasons for its inability to carry out the proposed measures.
"Multiplicity of disciplinary authorities would result in delays and subjectivity at various levels would result in conflicting decisions" the State said. On setting up of State Security Commission, it indicated that such measure "is likely to undermine the jurisdiction and power of a constitutionally established Government in a State and would work as a parallel body, which is not answerable or accountable to the people of the state."
<b>Regarding fixing of minimum tenure for DGPs the government felt that meritorious officers could be deprived of timely promotions. On separation of investigation, the government felt that the police force responsible for law and order alone could be better equipped to investigate criminal activities. </b>
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->