Though the picture remains bleak, the silver lining in the
cloud comes from successes like the right to information movement that gave
rise to a central, enabling law. This law, enacted in 2005, gives every
citizen the right to demand details of information from the hitherto
forbidden cave of government records. Even after we gave ourselves this law,
many among those who hold the reins of influence and power continue to
restrict its empowering influence. One of the saddest moments for our
democracy was when we were faced with the intransigence of the upper
echelons of the Indian judiciary who refused to fulfil this promise of a
culture of accountability and transparency. The triumph however was that
many of India’s high court judges voluntarily disclosed their assets and
made them public.
A special law was needed in India to ensure a citizen’s
inalienable right to know. Poor literacy figures matched by high dropout
rates in state schools forced Parliament to pass a law giving all children
from six to 14 years of age an inalienable right to education. While
substantial controversy surrounds the law that was passed on August 4 this
year – given that one, the preschool group has been kept out of the purview
of the act and two, the new law takes no clear position against the
privatisation of education – some substantial changes on the ground are
likely to follow this enactment. With hunger and starvation stalking our
rural and urban populations, not to mention the subversion and corruption in
the Public Distribution System, a right to food law is also on the anvil.
Laws, in both content and application, need a serious
reappraisal in the Indian context. The failure to drastically alter and
reform many laws which predate India’s independence has resulted in a
contradiction between the Indian Constitution on the one hand and laws that
actually militate against both equality and non-discrimination on the other.
The Police Act is one such law. During the 16 years of its existence CC
has been at the forefront of the movement for police reform. The Indian
police force continues to be governed by a Police Act enacted by the
British, a colonial power intent on controlling an alien population.
Officers of the Indian Police Service constitute barely three or four per
cent of the police force while the vast constabulary – normally hired after
completing a Class X or XII-level education – have to live with poor working
conditions and an absence of refresher training on the job. No political
party, regardless of ideological affiliation, is keen to free the Indian
police from political control. Increasingly violent and unconstitutional
actions by policemen have become the norm today. Only stray acts by
exceptional individuals sworn to constitutional norms and values redeem this
image of the police. Outdated sections of Indian criminal law, such as
Section 197 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, grant public servants
impunity from prosecution and act as further encouragement for unaccountable
actions.
The 1980s saw the enactment of several laws aimed at
empowering sections of the population that are discriminated against by both
society and state. The rape and dowry laws, followed more recently by the
Domestic Violence Act, are some examples. The Scheduled Castes and Scheduled
Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act 1989, which celebrates 20 years of its
existence in 2009, is another. None of these enactments have resulted in
diminished violent crimes against women or the scheduled castes and tribes!
Is it because, put simply, we have become more violent all around or is it
that law enforcement and accountability in law enforcement has not
accompanied the enactment of new legislation?
More than six decades later, institutions of the Indian
state need to seriously examine whether they in fact exist and function
for the people, of the people and by the people. Bowing to global
concerns on the state of human rights in India, India enacted the Protection
of Human Rights Act in 1993 and the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC),
a statutory body, was born. Sixteen years later, far from receiving a
glowing report card as an institution that demands and ensures high human
rights standards from state institutions, the NHRC’s own composition and
functioning raise important issues of accountability, transparency and
adherence to basic rights norms.
Once more we offer our readers the opportunity to take stock
of these critical questions through the incisive analysis of our valued
contributors. We hope you find this issue, which also marks ours 16th
anniversary, useful even as we eagerly look forward to your comments.