Behind law enforcement on campus
There is justifiable concern and fear on account of the ugly violence that was witnessed in Dhaka University on January18. The Daily Star editorial of January 20 takes serious note of the grave situation, specially the police inaction, urges political parties to realise the gravity of the matter and reminds them of their responsibility to stop such excesses by the students.
It is the aspect of the alleged police inaction in campus that this writer will focus on. One may have to agree that law and order maintenance or law enforcement in the educational institutions cannot be done in the usual or normal policing way in any society for obvious reasons. In other words, while dealing with young passionate minds a great deal of care and circumspection have to be displayed. The political guardians and all citizens would expect and demand that.
For historical reasons, the very sight of law enforcement personnel in educational institutions was an extremely unwelcome spectacle for a long time. The precincts of schools and colleges were considered sacred and entry of police therein amounted to a desecration of a holy site. For socio-political reasons, in post- liberation Bangladesh, the unavoidable co-existence of police and students in the campus did not raise many eyebrows.
In fact, in the altered scenario, heads of educational institutions, including vice-chancellors of prime universities, have often sent requisitions for deployment of police personnel, at times indicating the quantum and composition of such personnel. This was an unfortunate development with which we continue to live. However, the appearance of police for control can provoke a volatile student crowd into dangerous violence. This dimension needs to be kept in mind while criticising police inaction because fatalities in campus seriously disturb and inconvenience a political government.
The above has been mentioned not to condone the enforcement deficits witnessed on Monday last. The question is, was there an intelligence failure because there was no forewarning about the impending clashes? If that is so, whose fault is it? Beyond that, the important question is, shall educational institutions be treated as affected or disturbed areas where search, arrest and surveillance shall be regular phenomena?
Coming to specifics, shall police interpose between fighting groups of students in the campus? Some would suggest extensive preventive arrangements that should include keeping feuding student at safe distances. How desirable and feasible would that be? Let us not forget that the water cannon, for instance, with its obviously unfriendly military appearance, tends to provoke.
At the other end, there is often a temptation to reduce police presence in an area during "high tension" periods in an effort to reduce the opportunity for claims of provocation. However, it has been found through experience that this strategy is almost always counter-productive. In fact, this is often exactly what the criminals in a riot-prone area want the police to do. It allows them to consolidate their illegal activities in an area, with blatant criminal activities leading to further alienation of law-abiding elements against the police.
Under a situation as above, what course of action should be undertaken to prevent and ultimately stop the unfortunate violence in educational institutions? Are we actually prepared to look very carefully at the underlying causes of the conflict? Do our leaders reflect a concern with the causative factors at least as much as with tactical control of conflict situations?
There is a considered view that under our existing socio-political circumstances it is quite difficult for the saner and more sensible elements of the young population to join movements for social change. Since nature abhors a vacuum, it is only practical that vacancies resulting from the unwillingness of the desired lot are automatically filled in by ill-motivated desperados. The situation has turned vicious and the training ground for constitutional politics witnesses detestable wheeling-dealing. Brawn takes precedence over brain at the formative years.
The influence, positive or negative, of students on national life is felt by all. Some observers are of the view that there is, thus, a desperate effort to rise to, and cling on to, positions of authority in student organisations. This is natural as student outfits are found to be frontal and instrumental in achieving the so-called political objectives through confrontationist and agitational postures and actions. In such a scheme and under the situation obtaining in our environment, rash and indiscreet elements would often receive preference compared to sober and saner elements.
Coming to specifics, one may dare say without fear of contradiction that gone are the days when a potential student leader was mostly one of the top-notch intellectually, and was credited for high moral standards. He was honourably different and could draw respect and admiration. We now see some student leaders who are more known for their knowledge and application of the use and misuse of firearms and are adept at negotiation of tendering process and maintaining liaison with shady non-students. There is not much effort to discourage such immoral practices and, in course of time, these tainted youngsters turn into promoter-distributors of illegal favours.
In dealing with campus violence it would be proper to expect that the state must not be stripped of its benevolent character and the government should not appear less than representative by reason of tragic partisan action. Those in charge of the affairs of the state should stand on a high moral ground and ensure the creation of desirable political ethos befitting a democracy.
Muhammad Nurul Huda is a columnist for The Daily Star.
For all latest news, follow The Daily Star's Google News channel.
Comments