Community policing in Nepal

Community Policing: Lessons from Nepal

Dr. Govind Prasad Thapa[1]

Background

Crime is a complex issue. With the advancement of science and technology, urbanization, and the growth of population, it has become more untamable. To combat these, law making is not the only solution; rather it is the beginning of our efforts. The real success lies in the proper enforcement of these laws. Police are the instruments of State to enforce laws. They are the prime agencies tasked with ensuring security and maintaining law and order in the country. The police are tasked to carry out few major functions. The fundamental tasks of police are protection of life and property; prevention and detection of crime; maintenance of public law and order; and provision of assistance to the public. "The State is responsible for ensuring a minimum level of order and the police are one of several State entities tasked with giving effect to this obligation…an important precondition for adequately evaluating police practice is a full understanding of the background against which police operate-including all aspects of the broader security and criminal justice systems."[2] Today the State is expected to protect the economic, cultural, legal, social, and political rights of the citizen also.
Policing is a dynamic process. The objectives of policing are similar throughout the world; however the policing styles are different. There are several policng philosophies and approaches in use in the world. Some of them are--crisis policing, authoritarian policing, community policing, problem oriented policing, and information/intelligence led policing.[3] Nevertheless, none of these approaches are foolproof and so there is no room to be complacent in any of these current systems.
Authoritarian policing usually aligns itself with authoritarian systems. Police are inclined to act unilaterally and do whatever they consider best. The focus tends to be on controlling the population, rather than seeking a partnership. "Authoritarian policing always goes together with centralised systems where rank-and-file officers have little discretion on how to spend their days and local managers have little say in how to spend their resources…under these policing systems, human rights tend to be considered as an additional burden that place limits on the police…authoritarian policing, being so unresponsive to the public, is seriously hampered by a lack of contact between police and public and thus by access to information."[4]
Nepal has the legacy of regimental policing. The reformation of the present police, which took place in 1951/52, was the result of the amalgamation of militias, Rakshya Dal, Janamukti Sena, and the insurgents who took up arms against the hundred and four years of tyrannous Rana regime. Many freedom fighters, amongst them, Gyan Bahadur Yakthumba, Pahal Singh Lama, and Rom Bahadur Thapa joined police. Gyan Bahadur Yakthumba joined police with the rank of Major, who, later on, was promoted to the rank of Inspector General of Nepal police. Many others also occupied key positions in the police in the subsequent years. For that reason, the very foundation of the police was based upon the revolutionary and military mindset and culture. The duty of the police of that time was to support the political regime or the particular governments. The services to the people were of the least priority. The police basically misinterpreted their mission and "ruled" the people.
Contrary to this, the community policing is based upon the concept of partnership, for the purpose of increasing democratic, proactive, modern, and participative nature of the police. Thus, the model of community policing develops a feeling of shared ownership among people and helps to promote mutual trust and cooperation between police and people. As a result, this approach is more sustainable in comparison to other traditional way of policing.

Community Policing

Police need people's support for policing crimes. The core elements of community policing are the cosultation with people, get unanimous consent on developing strategies and plans, gather cooperation to implementation, and ensure proper coordination among the partners. It is a strategy of strenghening the capacity of the police and community to jointly combat crimes. It is a new style of policing. This philosophy of modern policing calls for client oriented, community based, and proactive policing. In a nustshell, the community policing is designed to make crime control a collaborative effort or multi-disciplinary approach. The basic characteristics of community policing are--it is more democratic, proactive, modern, and participative in nature. It is based upon the concept of partnership between community and police. This approach of policing builds and promotes mutual trust and cooperation between police and people.
The community-police partnership develops ownership among people and thus tries to solve the problem by involving people at local level. Effective community policing has a positive impact on reducing neighborhood crime, helping to reduce fear of crime and enhancing the quality of life in the community. It accomplishes these things by combining the efforts and resources of the police, local government and community members. It is a style of policing where every one is a part of the system and shares the benefit of working together. It increases the understanding among the community members and police. Community policing approaches differs from country to country, society to society, and from community to community. Community policing is commonly understood as being a strategy which encourages law enforcement agencies to work in partnership with society. In other words, the local communities are involved in the policing of local problems relating to crime and security.
Sir Robert Peel, the founder of the Metropolitan Police in London, who saw the role of the new police in 1829 has best explained the importance of community policing:
"to maintain at all times a relationship with the public that gives reality to the historic tradition that the police are the public and that the public are the police. The police being only members of the public that are paid to give full time attention to duties which are incumbent on every citizen in the interests of community welfare and existence."[5]

What Makes Community Policing Different?
Law enforcement has long recognized the need for cooperation with the community it serves. Officers speak to neighbourhoods groups, participate in business and civic events, consult with social agencies and take part in education programs for school children. Foot, bike and horse patrols bring police closer to the community.
More Effective Ways to Solve Ongoing Problems
Law enforcement leaders seeking innovative ways to enhance performance and maximize resources have struck a responsive chord across the nation with a variety of community policing initiatives. Government and community leaders are increasingly cognizant that they must accept a share of the responsibility for problems caused by lapses in many areas of society. Police have long borne a disproportionate share of this burden.
Renewed Emphasis on Crime Prevention
Law enforcement is looking to enhance its tough stance on crime with renewed focus on strategies that help prevent crime, reduce fear of crime and improve the quality of life in neighborhoods. This requires an intimate knowledge of the community. Policing concepts currently in vogue have tended to isolate officers from the communities they serve which can hamper crime-control efforts. Community policing allows law enforcement to get back to the principles upon which it was founded, to integrate itself once again into the fabric of the community so that the people come to the police for counsel and help before a serious problem arises, not after the fact.
Community Policing in Nepal

The Chhimeki Prahari system of policing was first established in early 1982. This system was an adoption of Singapore’s Neighbourhood Police Post (NPP). Numbers of police booths were established in the Kathmandu valley. The mandate for this Chhimeki Prahari was to patrol the areas and collect public grievances and demands—needs of all kinds. I remember myself going around the city corner—house-to-house—asking and taking records of local people’s needs and complaints as part of the public consultations. These demands and complaints were wide ranging in nature—from family matters to road, drinking water, telephone, street lights, sewerage, theft cases, gangsters, drugs, etc. These records were then reported back to the police headquarters. Understandably, only very few complaints were attempted. Rest of the complaints were forgotten and never addressed. So, both-people and police-lost interest in this police program. Nepal Police failed to effectively collaborate with people, governmental and non-governmental organisations. Therefore it did not sustain for long time.
Once again, after the peoples' democratic revolution, on 14 January 1994, a community police centre was established in Maharajgunj of Kathmandu as an NGO with the cooperation of local community. Similar types of police centres were also established in Chabahil and Baneswor of Kathmandu district as pilot projects. As of now, there are more than one hundred such community centres established in Nepal. These centres have different names: Community Service Forums; Community Service Society; Community Development Centre; Public Service Centre; Community Police Service Centre; Community Police Service Forums; Community Service Committee; Multipurpose Community Service Centres; Community Development Cooperative Forum etc. Almost all of these centres engage in a number of activities in addition to policing crime.
Through these centres, the police are able to participate in local development, women literacy, community health, child care, environmental preservation, health services, youth activities, and many other welfare programmes. This makes the Nepal's community police system quite different to that of Singapore’ Neighbourhood Police Post and Japan’s Coban system. This community policing approach has however, not been accepted as a credible style of policing by all. There are doubts amongst many police officers about the practicability of this approach. This is largely because they have failed to realize that it is possible to be a friend while simultaneously doing an effective police job.
The involvement of police in community partnership-based police projects is a powerful weapon in projecting a positive image. For this purpose, the police officers involved should be equipped with the appropriate skills and also take account of effective problem solving strategies. The Nepali community members have experienced that the police who work with communities are generally found to be more sensitive, reasonable, polite, cooperative, friendly, and helpful than those working in other police stations. They feel that those police officers who are responsible for community policing affairs would make a greater impression if they were based within that community. With the views to encourage these community police officers, the United Kingdom’s Department for International Development (DfID) Police Development Project has helped Nepal Police to develop an evaluation system and award ‘Community Police Person’ of the year since 2004.

Post conflict society and community policing

During the conflict, the Maoists were very suspicious of the involvement of the community members with the community centres. As community police centres proved to be very popular, Maoists increasingly perceived them to be threats to their interests. It was suspected that these centres were being used by the police to gather information from local sources. Consequently, the Maoists began to threaten all those associated with community centres policing and attack the centres. The Tikhedewal Community Development Centre in Lalitpur, for example, was bombed killing one Assistant Sub Inspector. They also attacked and killed one Sub Inspector in Baudha Community Police Centre in Kathmandu. In spite of this, the majority of all local community police centres continued to function. Since the agreement for the ceasefire and the conclusive talks between the Maoists and the government, these repressive attacks have stopped. Local communities are therefore again allowed to freely join community police programs throughout the country.
Nepal is a multi ethnic, multi religious, multicultural and multi lingual nation. Despite of this fact, the social and political justice systems are not equitable. Many victims, mostly those belonging to the socially marginalised groups, struggle to gain easy access to justice. The community policing strategy will not only empower local communities, but also address problems of social and political injustice justice. This will, in turn, promote greater inclusion of local people into the regular police force and foster feelings of ownership. This will help promote the community based policing system sustainable in the long run and ultimately strengthen democracy in the country. This programme will have greater positive impacts on the maintenance of law and order in the days to come in Nepal.

Community policing in Nepal: Needs for reforms

In Nepal, the establishment of community service centres and/or community policing project usually starts with the identification of a community’s security needs. This is done through consultation with members of the community. At this stage the community members list down all their needs, including those other than security. The police and community members then reach agreement on a business agenda and a modus operandi. This requires that the police be willing to participate in activities other than those required for the ‘business’ of law enforcement, so as to retain a strong group dynamic. Therefore, there are at least four stages in establishing a community police centre — consultation, consent, cooperation and coordination.
Successful community policing needs an organisational strategy that ensures everyone translates this philosophy into practice. It requires major changes to be incorporated into the policing system, particularly in regard to allowing frontline officers to be provided with greater autonomy, access to resources (which should be mobilised at the point of service), and an ability to focus on local problems. It also requires that the local problems identified are insightful to all groups in society – especially those people that are particularly disadvantaged or vulnerable.

The needs for public service oriented police services are at least reflected in one of the Police Mirrors, an annual magazine of Nepal police. It reads:

It has been our professional belief that the police service may not be considered police service in a real sense in the absence of a proper response to the grievances and problems of the sovereign Nepali people, prompt necessary action and adequate counselling and direction. In the light of this truth it has been highly essential for us to establish ourselves as the public service oriented, capable and efficient police in all respects through our conduct and to follow the working style of democratic police in the existing democratic system in the country.[6]

The above message is worth highlighting. In the past, the actions of the police have been exploited more for the protection of the government than serve the interests of the people. To date, all that has been done in the sector of community policing is the result of combined efforts by both communities and the police. The State, as of yet, does not recognise CBP as an effective method of enforcing law and order. As a consequence, this method has not been incorporated into the national plan. This shows a lack of long term vision, and a failure to create a uniform national strategic operational plan, management policy, direction, and coordination mechanism for present and future community policing projects.
These failures are closely tied up to the attitudes and interests of high ranking police officers from central level offices towards CBP. A Study Committee of Nepal police (1997) in a review of community policing programmes documented that the CBP could not be very successful for a number of reasons: First, there is a lack of interest and confidence among high ranking police officers; Second, there are no policy guidelines and clear cut mandates; Third, there are no operation plans; Fourth, the police do not possess the required level of knowledge and skills to run CBP schemes; Fifth, these programs lack resources, both, human and material; Sixth, there is a lack of accountability on the part of police to the community. Seventh, there are no follow-up programs to review, evaluate and redesign the CBP schemes in the country.
In order to improve the effectiveness of the community policing programs in Nepal, there are number of steps that need to be taken. Some of them are:[7]

Demonstrating effective leadership
Leadership is required at all levels within different institutions, for example, at national, regional, zonal, district and municipality, both within police and government structures; and also within communities where CBP is to be implemented.
Understanding the local context
Ensuring that the implementation of a community police program fosters cooperation and harmony in the community by bringing people together from different groups to address local and common problems of security.
Enabling access to justice
CBP is an integral part of the broader criminal justice and security sectors, necessitating a corporate, coherent and mutually reinforcing approach to all the elements in this sector.
Improving quality of service
CBP sees policing as a professional service to the public that responds to community needs. Quality of service consists of a number of different issues, for example, capacity, resources, training, facilities, equipment etc.; but above all an attitude on the part of the service provider that "quality matters".
Ensuring ownership
It is crucial to sustain a CBP programme over a long time. The programme must therefore, be owned by all levels and ranks within the police and at all levels within a community. The best way to ensure public ownership will be to enrol local people from the target community into the regular police and deploy them in their localities. This will reduce the cost and increase the capacity of police intelligence.
Recognise it as a national agenda
It is essential that the national agenda recognise that CBP is going to help address the problems of exclusion and marginalisation felt by many groups in society; and consequently improve security and justice delivery.
Institutionalise the program
The community based policing program has to be supported by national laws and policy. Police Acts must be reformed in accordance with these ideals.
Ensuring police accountability
Police should be accountable to the community so as to ensure professionalism, respect for human rights and limit police abuse. This practice in turn, will increase trust between the police and a community.
Tackling corruption
Police corruption undermines public trust and confidence in the police, de-motivates champions for change and diverts valuable funds from where they are most needed. The CBP program will help control police corruption.
Enhancing co-ordination and coherence
Duplication or contradictory reform efforts cause confusion, waste resources and can destroy or limit the will to undertake a community based policing program. Therefore, co-ordination and coherence are important within new initiatives (e.g. a broader justice and security sector reform) and between institutions working in the same area at national or international levels.
Capacity building – Training/Resources
It is important that training be provided, to the police, on the philosophy and practical implementation of CBP. Communities should also be provided with appropriate training support so as to ensure the sustainability of the programmes' desired goals. Sufficient resources are required so that CBP programmes can be promoted as a priority.


Conclusion

Community Based Policing (CBP) is both a philosophy and strategy that allows the police and community to work closely together in new ways to solve problems of crime, fear of crime, physical and social disorder and other neighbourhood problems. CBP aims to empower communities to solve their own security problems. This scheme breaks the tradition of top-down approaches to management and promotes a bottom-up approach. CBP relies more on the devotion, motivation, commitment, skill, knowledge, professionalism of the police officer at the field level rather than the rank and file of the department. Despite the numerous benefits of CBP schemes, it is not being fully utilised in Nepal. The reasons behind this include the continued prominence of more traditional attitudes towards policing. With the passage of time, it is crucial that we review the existing methods of policing and redesign a more people friendly policing system in Nepal.

Bibliography:

Colette Rausch (Editor), 2006: Combating Serious Crimes in Post conflict Societies, USIP, Washington, USA
Damian Lilly and Michael von Tangen Page, 2002: Security Sector Reform: The Challenges and Opportunities of the Privatisation of Security, International Alert, London, UK
---------------------, Police Mirror, Vol. X, 1997: Nepal Police, Kathmandu, Nepal
Anneke Osse, 2006: Understanding Policing-A Resource for Human Rights Activists, Amnesty International, Nederland
P. R. Kumaraswamy, 2004: Security beyond Survival, Sage Publications, New Delhi, India
Robert J. Fischer & Gion Green, 2004: Introduction to Security, Elsevier Publications, USA
-------------------, 2003: "Philosophy and Principles of Community-Based Policing", South Eastern Europe Clearinghouse for the Control of Small Arms and Light Weapons (SEESAC)Dr. Govind Prasad Thapa, 2007: "Community Policing: A Modern Philosophy of Policing Crimes", Prerana, National Police Academy, Kathmandu, Nepal
William Bratton, 1998: Turn Around, Random House New York
Dr. Stefen James Males, 1998: Practical Professional Policing, NPA, Kathmandu, Nepal
Dr. Stefen James Males, Amar Singh Shah, Chuda Bahadur Shrestha, 1998: Community Policing in Nepal, DFID Nepal, Kathmandu, Nepal
Prof. Dr. Tulsi /Ram Vaidhya, Prof. Dr. Triratna Manandhar, Dr Bhadraratna Bajracharya, 1995: Nepal Prahariko Itihas( History of Nepal Police), Police Headquarters, Kathmandu, Nepal
Retreat 2002: Andhra Pradesh Police Academy, Hyderabad, India
Geoff Berry, Jim Izat, Bob Mawby, Lynne Walley, 1995: Practical Police Management, Police Review Publishing Co. Ltd., London, UK
--------------------,Hand-book on Justice for Victims, UNODCCP, 1999
Mukesh Jain, "New Service Delivery Model of Policing" The Indian Police Journal, Vol XLVIII No. 4, Oct-Dec 2001
White Paper on Police, National Police Agency, Government of Japan, 1995
Criminal Justice in Japan, Asia and Far East Institute for the Prevention of crime and the Treatment of Offenders (UNAFEI), 2000
-----------------,"Policing with the Community in Northern Ireland", Police Service of Northern Ireland, 2000
Hesta Groenewald and Gordon Peake, 2004: "Police Reform through Community-Based Policing", International Peace Academy, New York
Wesley G. Skogan, 2005: "Community Policing" (Working Paper 30), to appear in: Prospects and Problems in an Era of Police Innovation: Contrasting Perspectives, edited by David Weisburd and Anthony A. Braga, Cambridge University Press, 2005
Dr. Govind Prasad Thapa, “The Counteractive Management against Human Trafficking in Nepal: The Law and its Enforcement”, 2002, PhD Thesis, (Unpublished)
Dr. Govind Prasad Thapa, “Rape Survivors: Psychosocial Problems and Investigation in Southern Asia”, chapter in Medical, Legal and Social Science Aspects of Child Sexual Exploitation, GW Publishing, USA, 2005
Research Report on Silent Suffering: Child Sexual Abuse in the Kathmandu Valley, Children's Perspectives, CWIN & Save the Children-Norway, 2003, Kathmandu, Nepalp, p.86
Deuba, Arzu Rana, Pinky S. Rana, 2001, A study on the Psycho-Social impacts of Violence Against Women and Girls with special focus on Rape, Incest and Polygamy, SAATHI, Kathmandu, Nepal
The Sexual Harassment upon the School Going Girls Children of Kathmandu Valley, Child Workers in Nepal Concerned Centre (CWIN) and Save the Children-Norway, Nepal (SCNN), 2003,
The Trial Court System in Nepal with Special Reference to Women's Accessibility to the Criminal Justice System of Nepal, CeLLRd, 2002
Narayan Belbase and Sucheta Pyakurel, Study of Gender and Judges, 1999
Baseline Survey on Criminal Justice System of Nepal, CeLLRd, 2002
What Do Victims Want?: Effective Strategies to Achieve Justice for Victims of Crime, IACP, 2000
--------------- Nepal's Penal System: An Agenda for Change, Centre for Victims of Torture, 2001
…………………, Analysis and Reform of the Criminal Justice Systems in Nepal, Center for Legal Research and Resource Development, Kathmandu, 1999, p. 118
Hawai County Community Policing: http://www.hawaiipolice.com/topPages/cpo.html#homeInvasion
Policing: http://www.policing.com/
Los Angeles Community Policing: http://www.lacp.org/
Community Policing-City of Pacific Grove: http://www.ci.pg.ca.us/police/compolicing.htm
Centre for the Study of Violence and Reconciliation: http://www.csvr.org.za/papers/papdux2.htm
Singapore Police Force: http://www.spf.gov.sg/
National Police Agency Japan: http://www.npa.go.jp/
Nepal Police: http://www.nepalpolice.gov.np


[1] Dr. Thapa is a retired Additional Inspector General of Nepal police. Currently he is the Chairperson of Centre for Security and Justice Studies, Nepal. He can be reached at dibrung@wlink.com.np
[2] Anneke Osse, Understanding Policing, Amnesty International Nederland, 2006, p. 55
[3] Ibid, pp.79-108
[4] Ibid

[5] As quoted in Philosophies and Principles of Community-based Policing, SEESAC, p. 2, 2003
[6] Police Mirror, Vol X, pp. 21-24, 1997, Nepal Police Headquarters, Kathmandu
[7] Adapted from Philosophies and Principles of Community-based Policing, SEESAC, 2003