Police Terror and the Theatre of Law

Context: The Jayaraj-Benicks case shows that without the proper rule of law, citizens are condemned to live in local tyrannies.

Issues in implementing the rule of law:

• Lack of independence: Our political institutions, including the judicial machinery, work on the personal command of the elected rulers.
• Lack of accountability: Local policemen think of themselves as sovereigns in their jurisdiction and executors of laws as per their will.
• Police brutality is a routine feature: The actions of the police are woven into the fabric of daily social interactions.

• The social superiority of police sanctions extra-legal behaviour that often has the stamp of rampaging criminality. 

• Controlling legal machinery:  For once under control, of elected ones brings enormous advantage, it functions at their pleasure. So they fight with all their might to control the legal machinery.
• Lack of judicial action: The lower courts do not play a legally substantive role in cases related to custodial torture.

• The action of remanding Jayaraj and Benicks to judicial custody exemplified an infirm, callous judicial system. 

• Excessive force: Excessive violence in pursuit of information and confession is still in practice despite it is illegal in most decent societies. 
• Purpose of brutality: It appears that any form of challenge to the police force had to be dealt with harshly to keep authoritarian rule works by fear, brooking no deviation. 

Conclusion: Our society is meant to be governed by the rule of law implemented by a state. It requires the presence of constraints on the police excesses, so that usage of force must be consistent with the dignity of a person.