Death for drugs is no solution

Nirmal Sandhu

Senior journalist

The  Punjab Cabinet's death-for-drugs decision may be intended to convey the leadership's resolve to end the menace, but in practice it would not make any more effective the fight against the menace. The government’s track record post the holy vow to "break the back" of drug trafficking in four weeks does not inspire hope. 

If there is political will to take on the scourge of drugs, regardless of the position or political affiliation of peddlers and their patrons, the need for telling the Centre to amend the law to provide for death to the first-time offenders would not arise at all.  

If the problem has persisted, it is partly because the laws already passed have not been enforced adequately and the conviction rate in drug cases is scandalously low. The CAG's shocking finding of 70 per cent acquittals in drug cases in the previous regime has spurred no rethink on what went wrong or action against anyone — from the incompetent or conniving investigating officer to the one at the top of the ladder.  

Acquittals may become much more frequent if the provision of death sentence is incorporated in the law. It will become harder to establish guilt in a life-and-death matter since evidence proffered will have to leave no space for even an iota of doubt. Death has been no deterrent to murders.  

Much more important is to reform the justice system, cut pendency and delays, build a professional police force, purge it of criminal elements and then give it a free hand with no political interference. The police-politics nexus has weakened the rule of law in the state, leading to the proliferation of drug mafia, gangsters, land grabbers, illegal sand miners and extortionists.  

Tuesday's Supreme Court ruling asking states to choose DGPs through the UPSC and giving the police chiefs a fixed term will strike at the root of the prevailing nexus. Punjab chief ministers have been known for hand-picking DGPs who are ever ready to carry out their bidding, legal or otherwise. The DGPs they appointed face, or had faced, criminal charges or cases. The practice extends to the level of SHOs, who are posted on the advice of MLAs or smaller political operatives. Incidentally, the drug menace spread during SAD’s tenure. It is, therefore, amusing to know of the Akali Dal now offering cooperation to the Congress in the renewed fight against drugs.      

In the past also, the Supreme Court has suggested police reforms, as in the Prakash Singh case, but these have remained mostly on paper. No CM in the past two decades has shown any interest in the reforms. 

It all boils down to how far a CM can go in enforcing the rule of law, uniformly and quickly. Every time the present CM faces a problem, he forms a committee. On the drug issue, he first set up a Special Task Force and then a two-member committee to study its report. While it is still on the "studying" job, the STF head has been sidelined, as also the DGP who has pointed an accusing finger at the police chief and another DGP-level officer. The CM has given both a clean chit without an inquiry.

The clarity on official protection to the high-profile suspects of drug trafficking —be they in politics or the police — is sought to be clouded by the argument that evidence available is insufficient for conviction. Gaps in evidence, if any, can be plugged only if there is a further investigation, possibly a court-monitored inquiry.

Now a committee reporting to the CM will monitor drug cases "on a day-to-day basis". By creating layers and layers, governance is being made complicated. This is just to delay and derail the normal process of the justice system and let the well-connected get away. Over time, witnesses fumble and tend to give contradictory statements. The not-so-clever motive is to pass administrative commotion as action. 

If the Centre accepts Punjab's recommendation on death for drugs, it would be small-time addicts-turned peddlers who would face the law. If a peddler — a former DSP — levels an allegation of getting protection from a political leader, his word is dismissed as of no consequence. The evidence gathered against him remains on paper. The possibility, therefore, is of the law being invoked against petty criminals or addicts-turned-peddlers who need medical treatment more than capital punishment. 

In a functional justice system, perjury is treated as a serious crime and a witness turning hostile is a rare phenomenon. In Punjab, intimidating or buying silence of witnesses is a common practice. Courts have passed strictures against shoddy investigations and recommended action against investigating officers trying to protect their political masters, but to no effect. Instead, their loyalty has been rewarded. This has happened in the disproportionate asset cases against the Badals. 

A far more effective deterrent to drug smuggling is to implement the existing laws, which is not done to the desired extent. Last year, the Punjab Cabinet had approved a law to confiscate property of convicts in drug cases. But leave aside any attachment of assets, conviction itself is a big challenge.  

Asset seizure can be an effective deterrent. After all, they all do it for money. The fear of losing everything may keep criminals in check. Guilty politicians need a sterner punishment. Apart from stripping them of all their assets, a life-time disqualification from politics can be an additional feature. A social boycott of drug smugglers, including those who escape the law, can put some pressure. No problem defies a solution provided people cooperate and join hands to solve it. 

By recommending death for drugs, the Punjab leadership has put the ball in the Centre's court. The leadership may cleverly pat its own back, but obviously this is not enough. Much more needs to be done. Systemic manipulation may help up to a point, but if things don't change soon enough, public anger reflected in the social media movement "Maro Ya Virodh Karo" can spill over to the streets.