By Rabi Raj Thapa

Policing and politics go hand in hand. Politicians in the legislative branch formulate legislation for police organizations, which is implemented by law enforcement agencies with and under the supervision of the oversight body, the Ministry of Home Affairs of the Nepal Government.  

Sadly, police organizations in Nepal have always been the victim of arbitrary subjective control of the oversight bodies for decades. Reading between the lines, the recent uproar of the retired police chiefs of the Nepal Police reflects deep-seated discontentment within and among in-service police personnel regarding the formulation of police legislation for both the Nepal Police and the Armed Police force. Although service holders seldom show their grievances due to organizational discipline, their suppressed discontentment has resulted in the rise of desertion and early resignation due to the low turnover of applicants in police recruitment.  

Police organization established in 1955 has sincerely upheld its sacred ethos of Truth, Service and Security (Satya, Sewa, Surakshya) for decades.  Similarly, the Armed Police Force, created just before 24 years has an ETHOS of Truth, Service and Commitments (Shanti Surakshya, Pratibadhata). Despite their difference, both organizations have grievances about the imposed arbitrary provisions that are not at all agreeable to many of their personnel. Then the question arises why and how can police efficiency rise when the law itself de-motivates and saps the morale and motivations that were supposed to enhance? Therefore, the new laws prescribed by the government for both police organizations need more critical review and consultation with the veterans and law enforcement experts.  

Any change or amendment of law demands genuine and valid reason. When this change fails to meet the expectations of its rulers and aspirations of the ruled, all these changes will be a futile attempt. In such cases, at least half of the blame has to be borne by the oversight bodies whether it is the Home Minister along the ministerial operatives in the formulation of the new law.  

Regarding the new law, the Nepali government itself seems to be in dilemma and confusion as to what type of police the current government wants. As a matter of fact, once three tiers of government are formed by the federal constitution, the status of the Chief District Officer (CDO) should have no overseeing role to play over the performance evaluation of police personnel. In any metropolitan town and district, a situation may arise where all three -- Metropolitan, Nepal Police and Armed Police Force work simultaneously, in such a case any performance evaluation by the CDO of only police agencies is illogical and faulty.  

Hence, when the government fails to enhance efficiency and professionalism and drive to de-motivate law enforcement personnel, that can have long-term repercussions that can tax both the server (law enforcement agencies) and the aspirations of the served, i.e. the people.

Policymakers and drafters of law must remember that police organizations are permanent entities whose personnel serve longer than any minister and ministry people. In addition, most law enforcement agencies develop unique bonds of work ethics, culture, norms and behavior that have been coined by the famous Greek philosopher Aristotle (384-322 BC) as ‘organizational ETHOS’. Therefore, it is obvious that the Nepal Army, Nepal Police or the Armed Police Force have their unique ethos to serve the nation and the people. In all these forces, their organizational ETHOSES are measured by the level of their confidence, experience, knowledge, credentials, and endorsements which any good observer can distinctly differentiate by the naked eye vividly. Today, the problem with police agencies is the intricacies caused by excessive politicization, domination, bureaucratic interference and interventions that have marred the spirit, motivation, morale and credibility which are the subject of the present law amendment by the oversight bodies.

Therefore, it is highly recommended to review, rethink and rewrite the police laws and regulations before it is too late. It would be far prudent and wiser “to stitch in time that can save nine”.