Modicum of Truth

“Encounter Killing” is a familiar term for most of us. It refers to extra judicial killing of gangsters and terrorists who are a menace to the society. In its most benign form is used as a substitute for the slow and often ineffective judicial process of conviction that fails to deter the guilty. But it is also used as a means to eliminate dissent in many parts of the world.

It is claimed to have been beneficial in controlling the underworld and terrorism in some parts of India. As these are mostly extra-judicial and staged operations, they arouse quite a lot of controversy particularly from the human rights activists. In many cases the specialists who have been nurtured for this role have graduated to roles where extra-judicial means becomes more a norm than an exception and used as shortcut, a means to promote private agenda and a way to settle disputes.

The practice of using such un-lawful means and building and encouraging individuals and organisations that have no respect for the process of law is not an invention of Indian Police or of modern times. It has been / is being practiced by corporations, ministries and even nations.

Bindran wala of Punjab was nurtured initially by our political process. Similarly Taliban was supported by US as a counter to Russian influence in Afghanistan. Look around we will be able to see many more examples.

We see many bureaucrats in our administration who are also nurtured, supported and used by their political bosses willing to adopt any means to further their agenda. We see examples of such encounter specialists even in business organisations who are used and encouraged for quick results not necessarily with physical violence.

In certain circumstances there may be a justification to cultivate a “Rambo” and use his service. Often these Rambos are brilliant people who might give outstanding results especially when not restricted by conventional restraints that are meant to safeguard the justice.

But we need to keep in mind that it is a dangerous experiment to be used in only rare occasions and with extreme caution. Otherwise it may be addictive. For the sake of expediency we take the easy road and then it may become difficult to put a stop and restrain the Rambo. Especially when they are giving us results. Accountability and safeguards get subverted in the altar of quick results.

It becomes even more dangerous if we allow such specialists to rise up to leadership positions with the same disregard for ordinary people and conventional processes.

It is equally or more important to prevent a situation where we need to resort to such extra-constitutional measures.

The question on the balance between intentions, actions and consequences has always confounded statesmen, philosophers, religious leaders and the common man. Pragmatic view often tilts towards the philosophy of “end justifies the means” with less attention in evaluation of the fairness of ‘means’ and reasonableness of ‘end’

It is here that we need to appreciate the true import of the serenity prayer

“Lord, grant me the serenity to accept the things that I cannot change; the courage to change the things that I can; and the wisdom to know the difference.” .. Reinhold Niebuhr