Social violence, it may be argued, is an inevitable aspect of almost all societies. However, its nature and extent varies across societies and cultures. A relatively stable society has less chaos and more order while a society in transition experiences breakdown of traditional norms, and customary checks and balances on human behaviour, and hence greater incidence of unruly behaviour.

Causes of violence as well as the means to deal with them, must be sought in the totality of the human environment: physical, economic, political, socio-cultural and technological.

Violence is a complex phenomenon because of its multiple causes. Varied theories have tried to explain the causes of violence. It ranges from political, economic, socio-cultural, ethnic, developmental and so on.

We are living in an era of political, social and religious turbulence. Today, even utopians hesitate to reject the system of policing and punishment as instruments of containing social violence.

The police including the paramilitary units are the principal agents of the State’s internal sovereignty. Their capacity to ensure the security of persons and property, to maintain law and order, and to play an active, yet, fair role in the administration of justice, are leading indicators of both the legitimacy and the viability of the State.

The role of police and the paramilitary as neutral and fair enforcers of law is even more critical in societies of plurality of castes, religions, ethnicity, languages, and races.

In countries governed by systems other than democracy, the police and the paramilitary are often just another tool of coercion, whereas in democracies they are held accountable to the elected government and the public.

Police is the arm of government which is charged with the duty of containing and preventing social violence. Therefore, it is pertinent to understand the relationship between police and social violence in order to devise an appropriate strategy for intervention. The relationship is two way, while the nature and intensity of violence impinges upon the role of police, the prevailing police culture and its organizational structure determines the efficacy of its response in dealing with situations.

In this context, the topic of this seminar is both thought provoking and challenging. It is also timely that the organizers should have picked up this subject, for its concerns not just the State, but society at large.

From a purely technical point of view, police has to deal with every manifestation of violence and while doing so, it is guided by a set of well-laid legal provisions and operating procedures. However, the nature of the social violence determines actual application of these principles. It is very obvious that the role of police would be different while dealing with an insurgency as compared with a situation of routine law and order maintenance.

In every society, assumption is that while the implied threat of coercive action in most cases ensures compliance with law, threats alone do not always suffice. In many circumstances use of force by police is a direct response to the violence of the offenders, including brute force directed at the police.

Such is the association between policing and violence that some theorists have gone so far as to define policing in terms of the use of violence or coercive force. While an insurgency situation may require greater use of force in the beginning to mitigate immediate danger to the safety and security of the citizens, a communal strife would require a more conciliatory approach. A judicious approach is sine qua non  of the police response while dealing with violence, lest the remedy may become worst than the disease.

The police have been dogged by allegations that they exceed their legitimate coercive powers by the use of excessive and even inappropriate violence; that they are violent beyond their warrant.

Looking at the Indian scene, we have experienced more than two centuries of violence involving its major communities – Hindus, Dalits, Sikhs, Christians, and Muslims. After almost every riot, the police are accused not only of incompetence and lack of professionalism, but at times it is alleged that its behaviour smacks of communal prejudices. Several Commissions of Inquiry have found fault with police behavior.

The scenario is no different when it comes to dealing with insurgency and terrorism. In recent times, we have had situations whereby even encounters against suspected terrorists by police were called in question. What is more worrying is that such criticism has come across from a wide section of people; media, reputed intellectuals and even senior political leaders. All of this might not be well founded but it does dent the credibility of police.

Because police are authorized and in fact expected to use force when necessary, some investigations also find it difficult to fault an officer for acting aggressively in a policing situation. Situations on the street can change rapidly and they are difficult to control, making it necessary to use force which might seem excessive to those who are not present on the spot.

The behaviour of police, to a great extent can be understood in terms of culture prevalent in the force which permeates the behaviour of its personnel. Police, more often than not is at the receiving end of the criticism by civil society, media and judicial institutions. At times such criticism is fair but at times it might not be well informed. Under these circumstances, police personnel tend to develop an insular defensive sub-culture which often gives rise to rationalization of their actions rather than taking an honest account of their behaviour. In the absence of an honest self-appraisal, the remedial measures are hard to come by.

The insular mode of the police culture, however, needs to be broken. Efforts in this direction have produced various models of community policing which aims to bring closer the police and the society. It is basically an exercise in trust building and reducing mutual antagonism which has demonstrated some initial signs of success, particularly in dealing with the causal factors of social violence and securing co-operation of the people.

Another aspect of policing which often is the most neglected one is the training of the police forces. There are instances when police personnel are deployed with a minimal training. In the absence of proper training, the void is filled by instruction of the more experienced cops which at times is the result of their own imperfect training. The emphasis should be given to the professional training which shall deal with the ethical aspects of policing.

Likewise, there are a host of other issues which impinge upon the role of police in tackling social violence which give rise to pertinent questions:

• Should the police retain its old structure or make a transition and device new structures congruent with a democratic polity, economic and scientific advancement?
• Is there a need to divide police functions into sub-categories like law and order maintenance and crime investigation so that specialized training could be provided?
• To break the defensive culture of police can we not change the system of judicial enquiry or other enquiry into police action after an incident to something constructive and more positive like having a truth commission?
• To what extent the police can be given functional independence and what kind of supervision needs to be installed?

I hope all these issues will find place during the course of this Conference. 

Despite the undoubted importance of ‘local knowledge’, sharing of cross-national experiences has great value as it can contribute to constructive debate on role of police in containing social violence. Willingness to consider a practice in respect of recruitment, training or system of accountability of police elsewhere, does not, however, mean acceptance of all such practices. We may reject great many of the practices elsewhere and yet there would remain particular approaches or practices that can make us reconsider our own. We must interject new ideas in our policing and look at the wider aspect of strengthening police culture in a manner that it becomes more responsive to society that it is meant to serve.

The Conference, I trust, will come up with constructive suggestions which might inform the future policy on this vital subject.

I have great pleasure in inaugurating this workshop and in wishing the deliberations of this workshop all success.