Does the judiciary really believe in CCTV cameras and torture-free policing?

In joco veritas in jest there is truth they say So Justice Teerath Thakurrsquos supposed attempt at levity mdash that installing CCTV cameras in prisons would spoil the inmates so much that they would feign torture and blackmail the guards into getting them chapati and chicken provides a peek into the judiciaryrsquos mindset regarding custodial violence and torture Justice Thakurrsquos comments came in course of a November 7 hearing in which the Supreme Court was adjudicating a PIL which demanded mandatory CCTV cameras in all prison cells and police lockupsThis statement made in an apparently jocular vein makes one wonder mdash what exactly is the approach of the judiciary to torture mdash be it by the police paramilitary forces or any state agencyUndoubtedly judges overall have been vocal in expressing their shock and indignation at the cruel and degrading treatment meted out by the law enforcement agencies For example right from the case of Nilabati Behera 1993 in which the court mandated that victims must be compensated to of course D K Basu 1997 in which comprehensive guidelines to rein in brutal and unscrupulous cops were laid down judges have been striving to ensure that custodial torture and violence are wiped off the lexicon However occasional bursts of indignation which further the cause of justice nevertheless are never a substitute for sound policy and it is here where not only the judiciary but the Indian state and its law enforcement agencies collectively falter by strutting out denialsIn 2001 criminologist and law professor Stanley Cohen contended that denial of torture by state agencies is common to all democracies but he was careful to draw a distinction between literal or straitjacket blunt denials and interpretative ones The former trotted out regularly by the police mdash that all allegations of custodial torture are only malicious canards spread by ldquothose human rightswallahsrdquo are ubiquitous but the latter are more insidious They take the form of euphemisms such as the CIArsquos ldquoenhanced interrogation techniquesrdquo or are issued by pointing out that there are laws and policies in place which supposedly provide adequate safeguards Another form of such denials consists of treating inmates as inherently mendacious malevolent and hence unworthy of the judiciaryrsquos consideration Consider for instance the Supreme Courtrsquos judgement in Sube Singh vs State of Haryana 2006 in which the judges accepted that despite the presence of telltale signs of custodial torture ldquoit may not be prudent to accept claims of human rights violations by persons having criminal records in a routine manner for awarding compensationrdquoComing back to CCTV cameras how can they act as a mitigating force against such infractions of peoplersquos inalienable rights Especially in Maharashtra where 15 yearsrsquo National Crime Research Bureau data mdash from 1999 to 2013 mdash shows 333 instances of custodial violence but only 43 FIRs 19 chargesheets and not a single conviction And more so in Mumbai where the policersquos infamous satyashodhak patta mdash that 2feet rubber belt attached to a wooden handle whose effects leave no fractures blood peeled skin or marks for a postmortem still rules the roost The Law Commissionrsquos 113th and 239th Reports demanded CCTVs in police stations and so did the Bombay High Court but to no avail On August 14 this year while hearing the anguished pleas for justice for Agnelo Valdaris murdered by the men in khaki in Wadala police station and Akash Karade who met a similar fate at the hands of the personnel of Samta Nagar police station the judges unequivocally stated that these cameras are a must for all 93 of Mumbairsquos police stations But the government continues to defiantly express cavalier disregard for accountabilityThere is overwhelming evidence to support this claim In February 2012 a study done by the police department in Rialto California showed that the usage of cameras in cells and on the uniforms and gear used by cops resulted in citizensrsquo complaints against police plunging by 88 per cent and officersrsquo use of force decreasing by 60 per cent in one year Even the police of a dictatorial state like Bahrain which faced international condemnation for brutally crushing prodemocracy protests in 2012 has all prison and police station cells under roundtheclock camera surveillance Only the rooms in which inmates meet their lawyers are excluded so that they can converse and discuss without being snooped upon The head honchos of Mumbai Police and privacy advocates would do well to look at a policy paper released by the American Civil Liberties Union in 2013 With remarkable precision it sets out why cameras are inalienable to police accountability for torture and other gruesome acts of violence and also proffers a slew of measures to prevent misuse and breaches of both privacy and the policersquos power to carry out law enforcement in a legitimate and legal manner without any fearBut when judges pour scorn over custodial rights even in jest one cannot help but accept the policersquos winkandnudge attitude to judgesrsquo pronouncements and ordersSaurav Datta is associated with the Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative Delhi which works towards better policing You can follow him on Twitter SauravDatta29