Surveillance begins at home
The culture of bribery has sometimes been justified – by those brazenly demanding it – as a consequence of the poor pay-scales prevalent in the police force. However, former Inspector General (IG) Sindh Police Niaz Ahmed Siddiqui unequivocally stated that the incidentals of serving in the police force – which includes residence, utilities, education and health care for the entire household – make up more than enough for the pitiful salaries, especially of the lower cadres.
Despite that, it has been confirmed through multiple sources that no effort is spared by the police, including maltreatment, intimidation and even torture, to coerce complainants into making illegitimate payments for even registering a First Information Report (FIR).
For the majority of citizens, the police apparatus is a hostile body and suggest that one should only venture into a police station if one enjoys any political influence or has the right connections. Only then is one treated in an appropriate manner. Seeking assistance from the police is often written off as hopeless but being the upholders of law, one is left with no choice but to approach them; which raises the question whether there is any solution that can remedy the behavior and performance of the forces.
And there is a solution: Surveillance. It implies installation of security cameras at various vantage points inside the police station to monitor the behavior of the officers and the events taking place inside. Considering the current state of the force, many think it is only through vigilance can the reformation of these vigilantes brought about.
The incumbent Capital City Police Officer for Karachi, Mr Waseem Ahmed, welcomed the suggestion – along with the review board formed of members of civil society – and stated that it would surely enhance the efficacy and performance of police stations provided the government provides the finances to implement such a system.
While former IG Mr Siddiqui agreed that the idea would help improve the performance and efficiency of the police force, he opined that 'surveillance' was a misnomer and 'in-house supervision' was a more appropriate term. He was also opposed to the idea of a separate body serving as a watchdog and suggested that the central or main police station should review the footage. He insisted that the objective of any such exercise should be to help the police and to bridge gaps between the local community and the police force, removing malfunctioning and malpractices rather than to create a body that could in anyway compromise the authority of the police force.
While the top tier of the force has acknowledged the possibility of such a project, a sub-inspector expressed reservations over the possible benefits of such a project. Chaudhry Muhammad Atta, Sub-Inspector posted at the Artillery Maidan police station, contented that the resources could be put to better use for the benefit of the
forces rather than creating an unnecessary supervisory body that would have little impact on performance.

But do we have the resources and wherewithal to implement such a system? Mr Muhammad Faheem Qureshi, whose firm GCS has installed cameras across various routes of the city for the City District Government Karachi, says that such a project could be implemented; he also pointed out that the technology also provides the option of on-site recording or recording at a dedicated central location, which in this instance could be the main police station or any other location as per the modalities of the project.
Ordinary citizens also say that it could drastically alter the treatment meted out at police stations. Qasim, a university student, said he would be willing to champion the idea on his university campus if such a need arises. His fellow students, too, welcomed the idea and said it should be implemented at the earliest. Furqan, a lawyer, opined that it would save a lot of time and trouble for citizens as policemen would be aware that their actions are under scrutiny. Qurut-ul-Ain, a journalist, while calling it a step in the right direction, said that more than surveillance is required to improve service at police stations. Mehreen, a developmental worker, emphasized the need for a transparent supervisory body and said that if the project is effective, it could be replicated at other public sector offices as well.
The private sector has benefited through surveillance in terms of efficiency and also as a superficial archive of employee behavior and performance. Surveillance cameras at police stations, irrespective of locality, can result in a modicum of respectability and hope for aggrieved citizens. While enterprising soldiers would surely find corners to carry out their misdemeanors, complainants will at least know that Closed Circuit Television (CCTV) will serve as a repository of visual evidence against any unnecessary demands made or problems created by the officers on duty.
While it is foolish to expect an overhaul of the system, such an implementation would be testimony of the willingness of those in power that they desire positive change. And it is not necessary to plant cameras in stations across the city. The experiment could be started with a few stations: the best and the worst performing ones. If there is any improvement in performance, then the proposed solution can be implemented further until the entire city's force is under scrutiny.
Obviously, such an undertaking requires a huge budget overlay. But many believe it would be a worthwhile investment and one which could have a possible ripple effect; and eventually result in the transformation and possible reformation of the entire public sector – and cameras under the table.