Police must be impartial law enforcers

block
Last Sunday, the Narayanganj police refused to record an attempted murder case against some local leaders and activists of Awami League and its front organisations in connection with the January 16 attack on city Mayor Selina Hayat Ivy. The police merely recorded a General Diary in this regard. We fail to understand, why the attempt to murder case wasn’t taken amid a spree of evidence and eye-witnesses.

If an elected representative of the people, such a City Mayor’s attempt to murder case is rejected by the police; it is easily understandable what the police are doing with the cases of ordinary citizens. Moreover, when asked why the police didn’t record the case, the Additional Superintendent of Narayanganj police is reported to have said ‘they were collecting necessary information and evidence regarding the GD.’

The point here is – the incident of attacks and clashes took place on January 16, and the police had got six days to collect evidence and information from the spot. Additionally, CCTV footage and photos taken from the spot are clear proof about the identity of the culprits. The question, however, why are the police taking so long? The answer is simple, the police cannot work independently when government’s own people are involved.

block

By now it is known to all, Mayor Ivy and around 50 others were injured as supporters of local AL lawmaker Shamim Osman attacked the Mayor’s followers, leading to a clash on Bangabandhu Road in the Narayanganj city’s Chashara area on January 16 over eviction of hawkers from footpaths. Given the nature of the clashes the GD should have been registered as a regular case and immediate steps should have been taken to arrest the accused.

Clearly, recording the case as a GD not an FIR means police have decided to give less importance to the incident. It is not enough to say such discriminatory acts on the part of police are not acceptable. No government allowed the police to become independent as prosecution police. This thinking is in line with the government’s policy to have full control over the police. Police are used as a political force of the government, not as impartial law enforcers.

We don’t want to believe the Narayanganj police to have become predisposed to protect the business interest of rowdy hooligans conducting hawker businesses by illegally occupying footpaths. And we also don’t expect the police to shield the politically influential criminals or their henchmen. The rowdy elements are a problem for law and order.

block