Dr. Satyawan Saurabh
One of the great tragedies of contemporary Indian politics is the erosion of the autonomy of our law enforcement agencies. This probably dates back to the Emergency in the mid-70s, after which every political party has continued this unhealthy practice with varying degrees of dogma. The independence of these agencies is the cornerstone of any vibrant democracy. For any democracy to flourish, its institutions of checks and balances must be allowed to function to prevent abuse of power by those in office.
Independent, law-abiding institutions play an important role in ensuring the necessary checks and balances. They provide the ultimate foundation for strong and resilient democracies. Recently, there have been many incidents of protest by the weaker sections of society in India. Furthermore, the nature of the suppression of dissent may reflect an imbalance of power between law enforcement agencies and citizens. Misuse of law enforcement agencies for political gains is a direct threat to democracy, Chhattisgarh fake encounter case – Security forces in Chhattisgarh were engaged in fake encounters – as revealed by a judicial inquiry.
The judicial inquiry, which completed a seven-year-long investigation, found that “Maoists” killed in so-called encounters were not Maoists, but innocent villagers. Further, the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act contains language that is broad and vague criminalizing “membership” of terrorist gangs or illegal organizations, without specifying what “membership” means. The problem of “fake encounters” has also long plagued Indian politics. In the recent Telangana encounter case, where, acting on a PIL, the Supreme Court ordered an inquiry by a “committee” with a reporting period of six months. Fake encounters happen because adequate accountability structures are not in place.
Misuse of investigative agencies for political profit and loss has been happening earlier as well, but the way this trend has increased in the form of an agenda in the last eight years is worrying as well as degrading the credibility of the investigating agencies. There is a step. There is a difference between the government and the ruling party. There is a difference between the ruling party and a special caucus, the few people at the top who decide what should happen and what should not happen. But this distinction is disappearing. The way important investigative agencies are being misused today only to form and bring down the government is neither auspicious for democracy nor for the government and agencies.Among the investigative agencies, which are most discussed to be misused for political reasons, the Enforcement Directorate, ie ED, comes first, which has the power to investigate economic crimes. Number two is the CBI, the Central Bureau of Investigation which has the power to investigate criminal cases, then there is the NIA which has been set up to investigate terror cases.When abuse of enforcement agencies becomes unchecked and widespread, it can render the institution dysfunctional by compromising its reputation, driving out legitimate users, or through sabotage by opportunistic interests. At the time of the Punjab elections, raids were conducted on the relatives of former Punjab Chief Minister Charanjit Singh Channi. Or the raids (and arrests) on DK Shivakumar around the time the government was toppled in Karnataka when law enforcement agencies become a tool in the hands of a regime to retain power and take revenge.Due process requires accountability. It requires an agency to answer for excesses. In the case of the ED, with its draconian powers of seizure and arrest, at the sole behest of a power-drunk government, the court has effectively allowed them to curtail their activities.
It is a malignant tumor for a healthy democracy. The prime constitutional duty of the Supreme Court is to protect the Constitution against the power of the executive as well as the misuse of the legislative majority to cripple fundamental constitutional guarantees. Law enforcement agencies act as instruments of sovereignty that have a monopoly on the use of force. However, it must be remembered that in a democracy like India, the people are the real sovereign as highlighted by the Preamble which states “We the People of India”. The government’s campaign against corruption is commendable; We need to take tough steps against the corrupt. But weaponizing the enforcement agencies in such a way that they trample on the fundamental liberties of a citizen including the right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty, does not augur well for our democracy.
