States to appeal before SC on police reforms

New Delhi, Dec 30 (UNI) A Home Ministry-convened meeting of Chief Ministers today strongly opposed the Supreme Court's direction to form a Security Commission and fixed tenure for police officers, and decided to approach the apex court with separate review petitions before January 3, the deadline set for implementation of radical police reforms.

In general, the Chief Ministers decided to eventually amend the archaic Police Act of 1861, which has never been radically amended since its enactment during the British rule.

The meeting, attended by Home Minister Shivraj Patil and Law Minister H R Bhardwaj, was represented either by the Chief Minister or Home Minister of all states.

Official sources told UNI here that it was decided by all the states to file individual affidavits before the Supreme Court, listing out practical difficulties in implementing the apex court guidelines on police reforms and also highlighting the steps already taken and those proposed to be taken by each state.

The Union Home Ministry, on its part, would file an affidavit of its own before the apex court.

Some of the states like West Bengal, Kerala and North Eastern states have asked the Centre to file a common affidavit on behalf of all of them, expressing the practical difficulties in implementing proposals like Security Commission, fixed tenure up to the level of Station House Officer and appointment of DGPs from a UPSC panel.

However, it was explained that it would not be possible for the centre to do so as law and order is a state subject.

All the states put up a united front against the proposal to set up a Police Commission in all states. It was suggested by the court that the commission should also have the leader of the Opposition.

The states were unanimous in their contention that such a Commission dominated by members decided by the High Court would in turn, make the states voiceless in matters of law and order. It was also pointed out that the control of law and order would go to the judiciary, while the Constituion envisaged that law and order maintenance is the full responsibility of the state governments, which could be dismissed under Article 356 for failure to maintain law and order.

More UNI SH SSC BS1834