SHILLONG: Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative, a New Delhi-based NGO, has expressed dissatisfaction over functioning of Meghalaya State Security Commission.
The NGO recently carried out a study on the activities of state security commissions all over the Country and subsequently published a report based on its findings.
The report — State Security Commissions: Bringing little to the table- a study of police oversight in India — said that the Commission was required to meet at least once in three-month but this was not followed as far as Meghalaya is concerned.
In Meghalaya, the Act says that the Commission will meet for an initial three years at least once a month and later every 3 months or more often if required by the exigencies of the situation.
“Yet again, this is not happening in reality, with the Commission having met five times since its establishment in 2011,” the report said.
The trend is that Meghalaya Security Commission meets only to prepare a panel of names to select the new DGP.
According to the report, the Supreme Court had envisaged an independent body in the form of Security Commission with significant autonomy and the mandate to chart out policies for a more efficient police organisation.
“Yet, the balanced composition suggested by the Court has been skewed, and the need for accountability to the legislature and binding powers ignored,” the report said.
The need to have community policing as stressed by the State Security Commissions is not being followed in Meghalaya.
“The State Security Commissions have emphasized the importance of community policing, and decided to galvanise citizen committees formed at the district, sub-division and police station level as well as initiating programmes aimed at constructive police-public relations on various issues such as human traffi cking, crime prevention and detection, child labour, crimes against women and drug abuse”, the report said.
However, in case of Meghalaya State Security Commission, community policing is yet to become a reality.
Analysing the functioning of Security Commissions in the country, the report said that unfortunately, that potential has in large measure been eroded by the infrequency and poor procedure of Commission meetings and the failure of the Commissions and state governments to ensure implementation of policies on the ground. “This is reinforced by the dearth of public information available on the structure of State Security Commissions, the substance of their meetings, their recommendations and actions taken. Unless these failings are addressed, the Commissions will struggle to induce far-reaching systemic change in policing”, the report added.
