Reform commission recommends restrictions on firing, proposes 5-step use of force

The indiscriminate use of lethal weapons during the student uprising has sparked widespread debate over the use of bullets to suppress protests, with some even proposing that police be stripped of their lethal weapons.

In this context, the Police Reform Commission has recommended stricter measures regarding the use of firearms to disperse protesters.

The recommendations, formulated by the Police Reform Commission under the interim government, outline a five-step escalation protocol for the use of force against demonstrators. These steps align with the UN Peacekeeping Force Policy and the Police Regulations, 1943.

The commission submitted its report to Chief Advisor Professor Muhammad Yunus on 15 January, advocating for the establishment of a neutral and independent Police Commission to oversee police management.

Three commission members told Prothom Alo that while the report offered opinions on forming such a commission, it did not provide specific structural recommendations. The police had previously proposed an 11-member commission and its structure, but the Reform Commission did not endorse a particular model.

A significant number of people were killed in the period between 16 July and the fall of the Sheikh Hasina government on 5 August. According to government estimates, 11,551 individuals with known names and addresses were injured, while 826 were killed.

The Human Rights Support Society, a non-governmental organisation, estimates that 70 per cent of these deaths were caused by gunfire. Reports indicate that law enforcement agencies deployed at least three types of lethal weapons to suppress the protests.

In response, the Police Reform Commission placed the issue of force usage at the forefront of its report. The five stages of the use of force protocol outlined in the commission’s recommendations are: preventing illegal gatherings without physical contact, maintaining a safe distance, using various techniques to control crowds, deploying small or personal firearms, and finally, using group weapons.

The recommendations state that when an organised crowd gathers for peaceful demonstrations, police officers should be deployed in a visible yet non-aggressive manner.

If the gathering is declared illegal but continues to grow, police may escalate their response accordingly. If demonstrators resort to violence, vandalism, or pose a direct threat to public safety, law enforcement can employ a range of non-lethal measures, including gas sprays, sound grenades, water cannons, gas or smoke canisters, stun canisters, soft kinetic projectile launchers, pepper spray, shotguns, and electric pistols.

Firearms may only be used in self-defense or to protect property, but even this right will be subject to strict limitations.

Regarding the recommendations, Abu Momtaz Saad Uddin Ahmed, Additional Secretary of the Public Security Division and a member of the Police Reform Commission, told Prothom Alo, “A significant number of people have lost their lives due to the excessive use of force by law enforcement agencies. That is why we have given the utmost importance to this issue. Additionally, we have strongly recommended the formation of a police commission.”

The recommendation states that if a procession or rally is declared illegal and the crowd is asked to disperse, police personnel should be deployed in a manner that allows protesters to leave the area as easily as possible.

At this stage, the police will operate in a way that creates psychological pressure on the crowd without engaging in physical contact. If the gathering persists, police officers will don protective gear, including steel helmets, bulletproof jackets, leg guards, arm guards, thigh guards, and gas masks, to maintain control and monitor the movement of the crowd.

The recommendation prepared by the police regarding the second stage of the use of force states that this stage applies when a crowd refuses to disperse even after being declared illegal by the police. If the crowd attempts to approach police personnel, officers will establish a safe distance using roadblocks, dispersal waves, and offensive jump tactics. These measures aim to minimise physical harm, reclaim occupied areas, and bring them under police control.

If, despite repeated resolution attempts and warnings, an illegally assembled crowd remains organised and shows no inclination to disperse, the third stage of force will be implemented.

This stage is warranted under specific conditions: if the procession or assembly crosses into unauthorised areas, posing a threat to lives and property; if the crowd refuses to disperse despite warnings; if force is required to prevent or deter criminal activity; if the crowd attempts to unlawfully breach a security perimeter; or if disorderly demonstrators attack in an effort to free detained or arrested individuals.

At this stage, the police will actively work to disperse or control the unlawful gathering using batons, gas spray, sound hand grenades, water cannons, gas and smoke canisters, hand stun canisters, soft kinetic projectile launchers, pepper spray, shotguns, and electric pistols. Additionally, targeted measures may be taken to apprehend group leaders and other key instigators of the unrest.

If the unlawful assembly refuses to disperse despite the use of various crowd-control techniques and instead becomes more organised and violent—engaging in widespread vandalism and causing injuries to police and civilians—the commanding officer will position their personnel strategically. The situation will be managed using water cannons, armored personnel carriers (APCs), and other crowd-control measures.

If necessary, and only with authorisation from the appropriate authorities, law enforcement may resort to the controlled use of shotguns, explosive grenades, and personal firearms for specific, targeted purposes. However, police officers must exercise maximum restraint in such situations. The decision to open fire on a crowd should be considered only as an absolute last resort.

According to the recommendations of the Police Reform Commission, the use of group firearms should be considered a last resort, only if an individual’s right to self-defense—whether concerning their body or property—is directly threatened. This extreme measure is to be employed only when all other methods of dispersing an unlawful assembly have failed. In such cases, and only with the approval of the appropriate authorities, a trained marksman may use group firearms to neutralise a specific target, potentially causing serious injury or death. 

The report states that force may be used at this stage to protect individuals or property, but only to the extent necessary. The right to self-defense remains valid as long as a clear threat persists, but excessive or unnecessary force must be avoided. If the attackers begin to disperse, security forces must immediately scale down their response. If needed, assistance from paramilitary and other forces may be sought to bring the situation under control. 

Police Reform Commission member Zarif Rahman told Prothom Alo that the recommendations emphasise ensuring that the police serve the people while upholding human rights. The commission has incorporated several proposals made by the police on various matters, including the formation of a new police commission, within its recommendations. Additionally, some proposals have been included as attachments in the report.

The police management authority submitted several recommendations to the reform commission outlining the structure and function of the proposed “Police Commission.”

According to the proposal, the commission would be a statutory, independent, and impartial body consisting of 11 members. A retired judge of the Appellate Division or a former Inspector General of Police (IGP) would serve as the chairperson. Members would be nominated, elected, or appointed on either a permanent or part-time basis. 

Four members of parliament would be included in the commission, nominated through consultations with the Speaker of the Jatiya Sangsad, the leader of the parliament, and the leader of the opposition.

 Of these, two would be nominated by the ruling party, one by the main opposition, and one by consensus among other political parties. Both political and non-political members would serve a four-year term, with no option for reappointment. 

In addition to political representatives, four non-political members from diverse professional backgrounds would be appointed on the recommendation of a selection committee. These would include a lawyer, a retired IGP, an academic with expertise in sociology or policing, and a human rights activist, with at least one of them being a woman. The remaining two members would be the Secretary of the Ministry of Home Affairs and the current IGP, who would act as the commission’s member-secretary. 

The proposal also outlines strict eligibility criteria for commission members. The chairperson and non-political members must not have been affiliated with any political party, either as members or representatives, within two years before their appointment.

Individuals who are bankrupt, loan defaulters, or tax evaders would be ineligible, as well as those holding profit-making positions in government-controlled organisations.

Additionally, anyone dismissed, removed, or compulsorily retired from government service for corruption or misconduct, or those with a criminal conviction, would be barred from serving on the commission. 

A senior official at police headquarters told Prothom Alo that political influence is the root cause of most controversies surrounding the police. He noted that the police have made several proposals to create a balance of power within law enforcement management, but ultimately, it will be up to the government to decide the future structure of the police force.

Among the proposals made by the police to the reform commission, the Inspector General of Police (IGP) will be appointed from a three-member panel. The Police Commission will recommend this panel to the President.

From there, the President will appoint the IGP. Regardless of the length of service of the officer, he can stay in the IGP post for a minimum of two years and a maximum of three years.

Apart from this, the head of specialised units and training institutions and range DIGs will also be appointed from the panel.

The commission can remove the IGP for four reasons. They are if he is convicted of a criminal offence, moral turpitude, physical or mental disability and bankruptcy or debt default or tax evasion.

The police proposal outlines how the functions of the Police Commission will be. It says that the commission will formulate a national public safety policy. If there is a need to prepare, amend or repeal police-related laws, rules and regulations, it will prepare a draft and send it to the concerned ministry for approval. It will determine the scope and activities of the police's legal force. The commission will work to formulate and standardise police recruitment, posting, and promotion policies.

The proposed commission would also include a three-member Complaint Management Committee, which would serve as the appellate authority for the existing system of handling complaints against police personnel. 

Commenting on the need for police reform, former IGP Abdul Qayyum told Prothom Alo that the police must be granted both authority and accountability. He emphasised that achieving this requires structural and legal reforms.

The most critical aspect of reform, according to him, is establishing clear policies for recruitment, posting, and promotion. Additionally, he reiterated the necessity of forming a "Police Commission" as the governing authority.

If this commission includes members of parliament from both the ruling and opposition parties, along with non-political experts, it would create a balance of power in police management, ensuring greater transparency and accountability.

* This report, originally published in Prothom Alo print and online editions in Bangla, has been rewritten in English by Farjana Liakat