Column

Rather than stringent laws, police need hard will to do the right thing

You have to respect the speed gun. It looks grand. In fact, in the hands of uniformed traffic cops, it looks like the sacred phallic symbol of a powerful sci-fi cult. And apparently, the gun costs Rs11 lakh. So while stuttering, fender-to-fender, on Mumbai roads, I consider the speed gun with fascination and reverence. My friends say they harbour similar sentiments about the phallic speed-retardant; and so do their friends, and their friends’ friends. It seems to me therefore that it is safe to say that in the multilevel matrix of public opinion, the speed gun is not disrespected. Now, if only we can say the same thing about the cops.

Cops like to think of themselves as incorruptible, courageous, super-efficient guardians of law and general righteousness. The case the cops make for themselves has not been widely persuasive. Most Mumbaikars think of cops as venal, twisted, and astonishingly capable of further moral malleability. While the prospect of the speed lurking round the bend may daunt some satans of speed, the availability of the palm-greasing option assuages their fears. It is clear to me, as it will be clear to anyone who hurtles on Mumbai roads to make up for time lost in the last gridlock, that law is not hostile because the law-keepers can be befriended with a small and furtive compensation.

That is why it is essential that the cops stop relying on stringency of law and focus instead on uncompromising implementation of relevant laws.

Last year, when DNA collaborated with traffic cops to campaign against drunken driving, the results were spectacular. The inexorable danger of spending a month in jail for driving under the influence was inducement enough for many cavalier alcohol enthusiasts to show impeccable sobriety on the roads. Till Friday evening 5,981 drivers faced simple imprisonment. What worked? The police were consistent, unyielding, and swift in ensuring that the law (a month’s enforced abstinence within a secure government facility) was applied. Drunken driving cases plunged within days of the campaign, and roads became safer, not to mention free of churlishly jettisoned bottles and involuntarily thrown up intestinal detritus.

But over the months, the police’s intensity has flagged. They are trying to substitute the deficiency in their will to keep up the good work with technology (the gun) and legislation (demand for a 10-year’s imprisonment for drunken driving).

Few people are scared. The latest drollery on dilated Mumbai motorways is: “Cops want ten years in jail? They probably want to up the bribe for letting drunks off”.

Well, my dear guardians of the law, the public has spoken, you have the gun, now just show some gumption.

raghu@dnaindia.net