Police Violence

Police Violence

1987 8 August 3-5 Police Violence: (884) An Objective Approach Communal violence is one of the most talked of subject these days, and discussions thereon are dominated by the fact that the brunt of police violence has to be borne by the Muslims. “The police are killers,” say Muslims. Their theme song is that the brutalities of Adolf Hitler and Chengiz Khan pale into insignificance beside what the police inflict on innocent citizens.

At face value, this would appear to be correct. But we must pause and give greater thought to the actual reasons for police ‘misconduct’. Why should it take place at all? If we marshall all of the facts, we see tht in every case, the situation has been aggravated more by the Muslims in question being easily provoked than by a desire on the part of police to be aggressive. And it is noteworthy that wherever Muslims are to be found living together in any concentration, this over-sensitiveness is very much in evidence; sooner or later, it is the Muslims themselves who have to pay dearly for it at every level.

Instances of present-day Muslims fighting amongst themselves are not uncommon. Due to some historical reasons they are easily insulted and then they become over-emotional. However, when it is a case of Muslim fighting Muslim, the quarrel is at least confined to the individuals concerned and does not, therefore, go beyond all normal civilized limits. But when the fight is between a Muslim and a Hindu, no matter how minor the provocation it very soon takes on a communal hue, and the price has to be paid by the whole community.

The worst kind of situation which develops in this way culminates in a confrontation with the police, or in U.P., with the PAC–The Provincial Armed Constabulary. No one seems to take into account the fact that if you pelt armed policemen with stones, they will retaliate with bullets. Why should they not make use of their superior weapons? While fighting with stray individuals is like playing with matches, fighting with the police is like playing with bombs. Why should we expect that the result will be anything other than general carnage?

One glaring example of this is the incident which took place in the Idgah at Moradabad on the 13th August, 1980. It was a case of pigs having been found within the precincts of the Idgah, at which the Muslims became highly enraged. The police officer on duty pleaded with the Muslims to remain calm and assured them that they would deal with the situation and that the culprits would be punished. But the Muslims were too incensed to listen to what the police had to say, and began pelting them with stones. The police officer himself was hit, and fell down seriously injured. Now it was the turn of the police to be provoked, and, of course, they did not discard their rifles in favour of stones. Ultimately it was the Muslims who suffered the most disastrous of consequences. And all because of their own ungovernable tempers.

It is clearly the Muslims who are the losers, whether at the individual or at the communal level, yet they do not stop to think of the ferocity with which reprisals will be carried out when they themselves have given into provocation, lashing out at all and sundry. They think it is like aiming a blow at a domestic animal which, if it reacts at all, will do so mildly and without rancour. They do not stop to consider that when they lash out in a frenzy of emotionalism, it is a savage wild beast with which they have to deal – an untamed monster, which will fight back with tooth and claw. The culminating point of their endeavour will be the inevitable backlash of police brutality.

Events having shown that Muslims clash not only with Hindus, but also with the police – they themselves paying the most devastating price for having allowed their sense of provocation to get out of hand – we should now ascertain where to lay the blame. Clearly, the greatest offenders are the journalists and leaders of the Muslim community itself. After each and every riot they cannot find words enough to describe the “brutality and savagery” of the police; in consequence, Muslims sentiments are kept perpetually on the boil. Their anger against and hatred for the police are never allowed to simmer down. As a result, whenever the police appear on the scene, they become enraged and hit out at them, trying by all possible means to humiliate them. This belligerent attitude on the part of Muslim newspapers and leaders is the root cause of the tense mutual hatred between Muslims and police.

The sole solution to the problem is to be found in the Quran, which bids us return good for evil: “Good and evil deeds are not alike. Requite evil with good, and he, between whom and you there is enmity, will become your dearest friend” (41: 34).

The result of acting out of goodness is that it has a softening effect on the enemy – to the point where he becomes a friend. Even the PAC would not be immune to such social palliatives. They are, after all, just human beings like everyone else, and would surely be open to an amicable and reasonable approach.