Punjab Assembly passes amendment bill to set up State Security Commission

• The Punjab state assembly on August 28, 2018 passed the Police (Amendment) Bill 2018 that would pave way for setting up of a State Security Commission for selection of the director general of police (DGP).
• The bill seeks to amend the Punjab Police Act 2007, which was enacted on February 5, 2008. The act did not provide for selection of the DGP from the panel as prepared by the Union Public Service Commission (UPSC).

Provisions of the Amendment Bill :

• Under the bill’s provisions, the state government shall select the DGP from amongst the Indian Police Service (IPS) from a panel of at least three eligible officers borne on the cadre of Punjab or any state cadre.
• As per the Bill, the appointed DGP shall have a tenure of not less than two years irrespective of his date of superannuation.

The following are the criterion for selecting the eligible officers :

• They should be in the rank of director general or be eligible to hold this rank for appointment as the DGP.
• They should be selected on the basis of their service record and range of experience.
• The officers should have a reasonable period of remainder service left, which shall in no case be less than 12 months as on the date of appointment

Composition of State Security Commission :

• The commission will be chaired by the state’s Chief Minister and will have the state’s Home Minister as its Vice-Chairperson.
• In case the CM holds the Home Department then, he may nominate any other minister as a member.
• The members of the commission will include the leader of the opposition in the Punjab Assembly, a retired high court judge, chief secretary, principal secretary to state government, department of home affairs and justice and state advocate general.

Background :

The state government had recently decided to amend the Punjab Police Act, 2007 to enable the constitution of a state police commission for appointment of the DGP, while deciding to seek a review of the Supreme Court order of July 3, 2018, directing states to appoint their DGP from a panel, which will be constituted by the UPSC based on the concerned state government's proposals.

Supreme Court Guidelines for appointing DGP of the State :

• In Prakash Singh's case, the SC court had issued directions concerning police reforms in the various States.
• This included a direction to select the DGP of the state "from amongst the three senior-most officers of the Department who have been empanelled for promotion to that rank by the Union Public Service Commission (UPSC) on the basis of their length of service, very good record and range of experience for heading the police force.
• In its July 3, 2018 orders, the SC has directed states that "when they anticipate vacancy in the post of DG, they shall send their proposals to the UPSC well in time which is at least three months prior to the date of retirement of the incumbent on the post.
• UPSC shall then prepare a panel as per the earlier directions of the court and intimate it to the states, which in turn shall immediately appoint one of the persons from that list.
• The apex court has further directed "that any legislation/rule framed by any of the States or the central government running counter to the direction shall remain in abeyance to the aforesaid extent.
• It has, however, granted liberty to the states to approach the court for modification of the above direction in the event they are aggrieved by it.
• The State of Punjab had enacted the Punjab Police Act, 2007 on February 5, 2008, and Section 6 of the Act dealt with the selection and term of office of the DGP "but does not provide for selection of DGPs from the panel as prepared by the UPSC."

Analysis :

• Police is a subject-matter covered under Entry 2, List II of the Seventh Schedule of the Constitution and thus is under the exclusive legislative domain of the State Government.
• After the enactment of the Punjab Police Act, 2007, the selection and appointment of the DGP would take place as per the provisions therein, and this would continue until the Act or any provision is specifically struck down by the Court in exercise of its powers of judicial review, having found the provision/Act to be unconstitutional.
• The directions issued in Prakash Singh's case were meant to operate only till such time as they were replaced by a suitable legislation (in this case the 2007 Act).
• The state legislations had been kept in abeyance in the order of July 3, which was passed without hearing any of the States on the provisions of the various State enactments.
• The Supreme Court overlooked the fact that the prayer of the Union of India in the application for directions did not concern the issue of empanelment by the UPSC at all and was only restricted to the term of the DGP.
• A writ petition of 2013, dealing with the constitutional validity of the state enactments, was still pending before the court, which did not take it up for hearing or consider it before passing its order.
• The SC order to be an infringement of the legislative and executive powers of the state, as well as the Parliament.The SC order "grossly restricts and interferes with the ability of the State to appoint a candidate as DGP who is responsible for administering, controlling and supervising the police service to ensure its efficiency, effectiveness, responsiveness and accountability in the State.
• AG has also suggested the various amendments to be made to the Punjab Police Act, 2007, to pave the way for setting up the state police commission.

Significance :

The development is significant as the present Director General of Police Suresh Arora is set to retire by September end.

By: Harman Sandhu