Policing challenges in the face of political influence
The term ‘police’ itself carries significant weight and pride. Public trust and confidence in law enforcement hinge on their role as the authority responsible for establishing and maintaining peace and order through the implementation of law. The effectiveness of the chain of command within police is crucial in upholding the trust placed in them, ensuring officers remain conscientious and steadfast in their duties. If this chain of command starts to waver, questions will arise regarding the organization’s ability to function effectively and maintain public trust. These concerns have not only arisen from the public but also from the officers, who have held key responsibilities within the police force. Some retired police officers argue that the chain of command, essential for an organization comprising approximately 78,000 troops, is weakening. If the central structure of command, considered the heart of the police organization, deteriorates, the accountability and a people-oriented approach within the police force will be affected.
And if the leadership of a professional and principled police organization, dedicated to the values of truth, service and security as embodied in the slogan “Satya Seva Surakshanam”, succumbs to political pressure, the organization risks weakening. This compromises its legitimacy, inviting continued scrutiny in the future. The police, tasked with conducting in-depth assessments of overall security, formulating integrated security plans and executing them effectively, must maintain autonomy.
Some retired police officers say they have seen dominance of politics within the structure of Nepal Police in recent times, which is a matter of serious concern. Practices influencing transfers, promotions and professional development of police personnel have taken a toll on the organization's integrity. Such activities may prompt complaints from aspiring police officers, even those aspiring to become Inspector General, who feel their safety is compromised. There is a looming question about the potential professional deviations in police personnel and the insecurity they may face upon retirement due to injustices in their career development.
Reports suggest that financial transactions with the involvement of power centers play a role in the appointment and transfer of police personnel. It is disheartening that the chain of command within the police force is entangled in these matters, posing a threat to the organization's structural integrity. The fear is that ongoing political interference may lead to a deterioration of the police structure.
A police organization operating on an honest and professional chain of command is not a business entity, an industrial venture, or a commercial organization. Yet, internal competition and dynamics have turned certain activities into open secrets. Accepting maneuvers by police personnel for personal gains, influenced by power centers within political parties, raises concerns about encouraging unethical behavior. The unprofessional competition for the position of Inspector General is viewed as potentially weakening the chain of command within the police. Addressing these issues is crucial for preserving professionalism and integrity of the police force and maintaining public trust.
The imperative for development is pressing in a poor country like ours. Achieving the status of a developing nation requires collaboration at every level. To expedite our developmental pursuits, it is crucial to promptly halt the unwarranted interference of political leaders. The foremost priority is to recognize that restoring peace and security is the initial step toward the country's development. The security organization entrusted with safeguarding the nation and its people follows its own operational methods and procedures. It is not an entity directed by political appointees. However, as the influence of politics encroaches upon this organization, led by an individual with years of experience in a disciplined setting, doubts begin to surface regarding the chain of command and the autonomous responsibilities fulfilled by this crucial institution. When those leading the organization, funded by taxpayers, start functioning like the leaders of sister organizations of political parties, skepticism among ordinary citizens about the police organization becomes inevitable.
The pervasive influence of politics on the daily operations of the police has compromised the trust of honest, professional and dedicated officers, who envision a future in the police profession. The impact of political interference is evident in the skewed career advancement, where some officers, owing to political connections, ascend to higher ranks, undermining professional development of their honest counterparts, who refrain from seeking favor from leadership. Looking back at past events, we see a tense competition for leadership roles within the police force. Unfortunately, even those who attain leadership positions appear hesitant to champion the organization's interests independently, succumbing to pressure from groups with divergent agendas. Instead of prioritizing the welfare of the organization and its dutiful employees, leaders seem preoccupied with cultivating alliances with political parties and their leaders.
It is undeniable that an organization catering to the interests of political parties, despite awareness of wrongdoing within its ranks and leadership, and remaining indifferent to its committed employees, is destined to weaken and deviate from its overarching goals. The persisting question remains: When will the interference of political parties in the chain of command of the Nepal Police cease? It is difficult to find an easy answer to this question.
Let’s discuss ways to strengthen Nepali Army
Recent calls from some lawmakers for downsizing the Nepali Army and using the money thus saved for development works have courted controversies.
On July 11, a National Assembly member and former minister for foreign affairs, Bimala Rai Paudyal, stood in the parliament in favor of downsizing the national army while taking part in a discussion on cost-cutting measures. Paudyal reasoned that Nepal did not need a big army in times of peace and that it would be impossible for the army to defend the country against either of the two neighbors even if the need arose, while also pointing out the army had not been able to protect the borders.
Swarnim Wagle, an economist and lawmaker from the Rastriya Swatantra Party, has also been advocating for downsizing the national army as a means to reduce pressure on the economy. Citing Sri Lanka’s example, which reduced the size of its army by a third to combat the recent recession, Wagle argued during a meeting of the House of Representatives on June 20 that Nepal should consider similar measures.
These calls from the two parliamentarians, who are also PhD scholars, have sparked a series of discussions at the national level. While these are not the first such calls, it is the first time a debate has taken place in the parliament on the matter. Discussions about the national army are not unwarranted, but they should be contextual and based on facts. A state’s policies and plans determine the size and the structure of its army, so it will be far-fetched to take the army leadership as the sole factor in this.
Development and expansion of any institute, including the national army, takes a long time, hard work, and investment, with the concerned state’s plans and policies playing a vital role in the whole process. Therefore, demands for reduction, structural changes, or removal of responsibilities should be based on careful consideration rather than momentary impulses, even if they are coming from scholars. Instead of arguing irresponsibly (without presenting solid proof to back their arguments) and eroding the morale of the army, policymakers should focus more on enhancing the army’s capabilities.
History and the way forward
The history of the Nepali Army is closely linked with the unification of modern Nepal. Founded by King Prithvi Narayan Shah to support the unification campaign, the army has evolved into its current form. It has a rich history of engaging in various wars and is considered the most experienced army in South Asia in terms of war experience. The army has played an important role in the Nepal-Tibet War, Nepal-China War, the war with East India Company (Anglo-Nepal War), quelling the unrest in Hyderabad at the request of India, ending the Indian Sepoy Mutiny as well as ending the Khampa conflict within the country and in controlling the 10-year Maoist insurgency. Apart from maintaining peace, the army is adept at military diplomacy. Helping the country overcome critical situations like the blockade along with the import of vaccines and health materials from neighboring and friendly countries during the pandemic are vivid examples of military diplomacy. Its important role in life and death situations like natural disasters and epidemics has not gone unnoticed.
Internal or external crises are not something that can be predicted. That is why, the army must stand ready to deal with potential emergencies even during peacetime. Commendable work of the army during earthquakes, tornadoes, pandemics, floods, landslides, and fires demonstrates its significance in crisis situations.
As underlined above, the army has different roles to play in different parts of Nepal and beyond. NA soldiers serve in the United Nations’ peacekeeping missions, provide security to infrastructure, guard national parks, conduct search and rescue missions during natural disasters and play different roles in development projects as per government directives. Therefore, before debating the number of soldiers required in Nepal, it is essential to understand the organizational structure of the army. On the other hand, while the situation of unemployment and youth migration is dire, young people are getting jobs and serving the country. Contrary to the expert MPs’ argument, the state’s investment in the army has not gone waste.
Of course, debates about the army are necessary. But such debates should not lower the morale of the army or weaken its structure. Rather, the debates should focus on making the army more and more capable by developing world-class military technologies and competing in the fields of information and technology. Policy-level discussions should explore the possibility of creating more jobs within the military structure so as to reduce the outmigration of young people.
Summing up, those responsible for running the state should effectively mobilize available resources and explore sustainable resources for the future rather than advocating for the destruction of existing state structures in the pretext of an economic crisis.
