The Police is a body of officers embodying the civil authority of government. Police are usually responsible for maintaining public order and safety, enforcing the law, and preventing, detecting, and investigating criminal activities. These functions are known as policing. Hence, the Police is a civil law enforcement agency. Police are often also entrusted with various licensing and regulatory activities. Commonly, the Police are an integral part of the criminal justice system of a country and an enforceable force of law, rules and regulations. The legal competency of the Police is paramount for their conduct and operations. The lifeforce of law is the pivot across the Police perform its operations to regulate, perform and execute the law regimes of a country in a specific structural domain.

However, police critics have criticized this popular understanding of the word Police that it refers to members of a public organization having the legal competence to maintain order and enforce the law. They explain it for two fundamental reasons. First, it defines Police by their ends rather than by the means they use to accomplish their goals. Second, the assortment of situations in which Police are asked to intervene is much greater than in law enforcement and order maintenance. There is currently a concurrence among researchers, based on a definition first proposed by American sociologist Egon Bittner, that the standard feature among all the agencies engaged in policing is the legal competence to enforce coercive, non-negotiable measures to resolve problematic situations and circumstances. Such situations are characterized by their potential for harm and the need to solve them urgently before they develop the potential for lawlessness and anarchy. Hence, the actual use of coercion or the threat of utilizing it allows Police to put a quick, non-negotiated, and conclusive end to problematic situations. 

Following that definition, policing thus may be performed by several professional organizations: public police forces, private security agencies, the military, and government agencies with various surveillance and investigative powers. The best known of these bodies are the public police forces that patrol public spaces, often in marked cars, and whose members wear a uniform. They conduct operations, investigations and prosecution of civil crimes. They are the most visible representatives of the civil authority of government and provide the model typically associated with police organizations. Furthermore, security and intelligence agencies that generally operate undercover have played an increasingly substantial role in combating terrorism, especially since the September 11 attacks in the United States in 2001 and its subsequent fallout in Pakistan. Policing has become a complex assignment that straddles the traditional institutional and jurisdictional distinctions between public and private, criminal and political.

The Article shall dissect the reforming of the Police on five rules of civil service reforms. The five rules include the implementation of the constitution, ensuring structural alignment, cadre specialization, recoding the laws and improving terms and conditions of the police service. Police reforms in Pakistan have always been an eyewash. These often fail even before they start. Unfortunately, there are police monopolies in the administrative corridors of power, and politicians have yet to be able to dissect and lead the processes of police reforms. So far, all police reforms committees and commissions have been headed by the federal Police Service of Pakistan PSP.

Consequently, politicians depend upon civil servants’ craft in administration affairs and even reforming the services. The primary question is, who will reform the Police in Pakistan? Constitutionally, it is the mandate and obligation of the political executive to reform the Police, but this has never been the case. Politicians always empower the federal PSPs to reform police services, and the latter always uphold the colonial scheme of reserving provincial posts for central services. Therefore, the police reforms have only been restricted to changes in the functions of the Police, not structural changes in the Police. The existing scheme of reserving provincial posts for central services conflicts with constitutional federalism and the Provincial Civil Servants Acts. Consequently, the governments can only perpetrate the objectives of police reforms if independent constitutional and structural experts are empowered to reform the police services in place of federal PSPs. The primary and foremost question to reforming Police is who will reform the Police?

Pakistan is a federal republic state. Thus Police reforms require fundamental constitutional alignment. The primary question is which government is constitutionally empowered to raise and maintain the police service? Furthermore, should Police be organized centrally or provincially? The administration of the Police is a provincial subject according to Article 70(4) and schedule IV of the constitution. Then, it requires clarity that there is a difference between law and order and the establishment of Police. The Police are one of the organs that implement the legal structures of law and order. Hence, several other national and provincial agencies are also competently employed to ensure law and order in the country. Law and order is a vast concept. It also comprises national and defence security mechanisms. Therefore, law and order contain multiple functions, and federal and provincial enforcement agencies may execute their operations. The essay is about the establishment of the Police and its functions. Chapter two of the constitution enforces policy principles under article 37 (i) to decentralize the administration to facilitate expeditious disposal of its business to meet the convenience and requirements of the public. Schedule IV of the constitution divides subjects between federation and provinces. It is the fundamental place where federal and provincial constitutional competence is determined. Neither legislation nor delegated legislation or policy legislation can be made repugnant to the divisions of powers enunciated in schedule IV of the constitution. The federal legislative list part I and II specifically explain the powers of the federation and council of common interests CCI. Neither law and order nor policing is a federal or common subject of CCI. Hence, law and order to the extent of civil domain and establishment of Police are purely provincial subjects. The FLL explicitly provides those parts of law and orders that federal law enforcement agencies can carry out. 

As explained earlier, the Police is a provincial subject. Now, the other question arises which provincial department shall raise the establishment of a police force? Article 139 of the constitution empowers the provincial governments to construct and conduct their business of the provincial governments. It reads as follows;

Article 139. Conduct of business of Provincial Government.—

(1) All executive actions of the Provincial Government shall be expressed to be taken in the name of the Governor.

(2) The 2[Provincial Government] shall by rules specify the manner in which orders and other instruments made and executed 2[in the name of Governor] shall be authenticated, and the validity of any order or instrument so authenticated shall not be questioned in any Court on the ground that it was not made or executed by the Governor.

(3) The Provincial Government shall also make rules for the allocation and transaction of its business.

Accordingly, the provincial governments framed their rules of business to conduct the affairs of provincial governments. Provincial rules of business establish that Police are an integral part of the Home Department of a province. Hence, it creates that Police is not a department but a specialized agency of the Home Department. On top of it, schedule IV and Provincial rules of business conclude that Police is a provincial domain. To fetch the argument further, the Punjab Government Rules of Business, 2011 categorically places the establishment of Polic as an affair of a Home department. Section 13 of the rules of business, 2011 explains as follows;

(13) All matters connected to policing, including:

(a) Police establishments and their administration

(b) Police rules, and

(c) Police works

Schedule IV and Punjab Government Rules of Business, 2011 conclude that Police is a provincial constitutional entity. Yet, in consonance with the constitutional provisions, it is constitutionally required to raise police service provincially, not centrally. Hence, the best process for reforming the Police is to implement the constitution. Law and order and Police are provincial subjects. Article 240 (b) of the constitution empowers the provincial assembly to legislate provincial posts and services. The Punjab government rules of business, 2011 empower the province’s Home Department to raise provincial police service. However, against the constitutional scheme, the Police are organized centrally in the form of the Police service of Pakistan (PSP) without enactment and legal instruments. Therefore it is a constitutional obligation that the federal Police must work in the federal domain and all Pakistan police in the domain of CCI. Article 142 (b) talks about the concurrence of criminal law, evidence and criminal procedure. Then, this concurrence has nothing to do with establishing the Police as a provincial entity. Article 142(b), read with Article 142(c), establishes the legislative jurisdiction of concurrence and provincial domain. Then, the explanation clause in Article 240 to form an All Pakistan Service has nothing to do with the provincial Police. Through the forum of CCI, the federal government can create only All Pakistan police on common posts of common subjects in CCI. Hence, the reservation of posts connected with the affairs of a province for federal or all Pakistan service is unconstitutional as it creates legislative, executive and financial anomalies.      

Accordingly, the foremost requirement of police reforms is the creation of the Provincial Police Service (PPS) on posts connected with the affairs of the Home department. It is a constitutional obligation to align the post, cadre, service and subject of the exact government and the legislature in the federation of Pakistan. Furthermore, it is critical for executive alignment for the executive branch of the government. The law does not allow the maintenance of a Federal Police Service of Pakistan PSP on posts of the Provincial Home Department. How can provinces perform operations of policing where federal PSP officers are posted on provincial posts and not accountable to provincial political executives and law? Then, abolishing the class system in the police force is a structural requirement for the proficiency and career progression of police human resources. How can superior and inferior ranks form a joint police force? The Police should be organized at a lower level of recruitment and promoted systematically to the higher ranks without lateral entry or recruitment. This vertical mobility must have cadre alignment. Creating specialized cadres according to police functions is critical for the performance of police service. Although the other civil services need to have lateral entries, for the cadres of Police, lateral entries obstruct human resource management. Police are comparatively a specialized function and must have vertical growth of cadres. The General cadre of Police extends to federal and provincial tiers, including the specialties of investigation, operations, prosecution, administration, traffic, and other police organizations such as, telecommunication, Elite force, Institutions of Training wing, Special Protection Unit(SPU), Special Branch, Finger print Bureau, Punjab Highway Petrol, FIA, ANF, Motorway Police, IB etc. is the reason for inefficiency and administrative obstructions. Moreover, Policing does not mean showcasing managerial skills only for a general cadre but instead developing core operations, investigation, prosecution and administration skills for the specialized cadres. Is it justifiable to recruit a superior human resource only for administration, excluding the core matters of operations, investigation, and prosecution?

Policing is a devolved subject all over the world. Even it is devolved into the levels of districts. It is also equally important the Police is devolved from provinces to districts as it needs a devolution from federation to provinces. 

Historically, in 1949, the federal executive authority framed the police cadre rules to create a central Police Service of Pakistan (PSP) without any act of the constituent assembly. Those rules had no legal basis. General Zia again tried to legalize the PSP through the police cadre rules of 1985. Police kingpins quote the saving clause of Article 241 of the constitution to protect their service. Still, the Article provides them with no such protection as the police service never existed legally through an act of parliament. Even the central legislature could not have passed for want of legislative competence, the Police being a provincial subject.

Strangely enough, for their reform agenda, the Police prefer the laws of Zia and Musharraf or resort to judicial forums when convenient.

What the police elite want is that their service should be central so that the provincial government may not take disciplinary action against their officers for misconduct. Second, the police elite wants complete control and authority over their officers’ transfer and postings. Suppose the provincial executive would neither have a say in the transfer and posting nor would it be able to suspend or dismiss a police officer for misconduct. Why would it retain the Police as a provincial force?

Let’s understand the class system of Police in Pakistan! Police officers want the security of tenure for the positions of SP to IG, which is a good idea for service delivery. However, in the same breath, they oppose the security of tenure for SHOs. They transfer soft SHOs monthly – though legally speaking, only an SHO has legal powers under the law, and all other officers’ functions are supervisory.

The institution of the police station, which is the linchpin of the whole system, has been made redundant by the police bureaucracy. It needs a budget and independence for the required service delivery. Although the governments give the Police billions of annual budget, the third most significant outlay is after education and health. Even if a few million is allocated for each police station, it would cost only a few billion for the majority of police stations in provinces to make their model service centres. The budget spending is the same in all provinces. There is no scrutiny of the budgeting of Police in all the provinces. Equitable resource mobilization in the Police is critical for policing. Police reforms do not mean only to enhance the perks and privileges of the senior officers, as has been the case, but to improve the structures of the Police.

Referring to case law, in the Sindh High Court, the petitioners quoted extensively from a 2006 Parkash Singh case of the Indian Supreme Court, which asked provinces to enact A Model Police Act by their consent. Even in India, under the Model Act promulgated by some states, the director general of Police who heads the Police in a province is appointed by state governments without any interference from the central government, and provincial governments exercise complete executive authority over the Police. Hence, India is a union, not a federation and that too with a concurrent list. Pakistan is a federation without a concurrent list of policing. 142(b) is not about policing in the whole scheme of the constitution. How can a federation appoint an Inspector General of Police in a province?

Furthermore, so-called reform agendas never aimed at depoliticizing Police but rather making the Police unaccountable and a state within a state.

The constitution is the supreme organ of a state. The law and order and establishment of Police are provincial subject; how can federal legislative and executive authority affect a provincial matter after the 18th amendment? After abolishing the concurrent list, the council of common interests became common between the federation and provinces. CCI holds control of the federal legislative list part II as the latter has 18 exclusive powers according to federal legislative list part II. The federal government, through CCI, can only raise common or all Pakistan services among the common subjects of CCI. Hence, the existing scheme of Police is unconstitutional, and the creation of Provincial Police on posts connected with the affairs of a province is the only constitutional solution towards effective policing and people accountability.

The police reforms process has two substantial parts. The first deals with the establishment of the Police, and the other is about the functions of the Police. All police reform initiatives in Pakistan hardly dissected the establishment of the Police. However, the functions and their authority have always been part of police reforms. Article 175 (3) of the constitution of Pakistan provided to separate the judiciary from the executive within fourteen years from the commencing day of the constitution. Earlier, the District magistrate’s office was held by the Deputy Commissioner. Therefore, the then Police were answerable to the office of the District Magistrate. Hence, the DC was a supervisory officer for the Police in a district. As, progressively, the judiciary got separated from the executive, and the judiciary took all judicial powers of DC, the Police also started to campaign to be separated from the office of DC. Then, in 2002, with the promulgation of the Police order, the Police were separated from the office of DC. However, it was a change of command for the Police; the government changed their supervisory command from the office of DC to District Nazim.

The change of command raises a fundamental question? The Police is an arbitrary power of a government. Hence, it requires a supervisory office to execute the operations of the Police. How can Police operate without a supervisory office in a democracy? With local body acts changing, the Police became independent of any supervision. Here, the arbitrary issue of policing began, transforming Police into a random force. All powers were vested in the office of the District Police Officer, who was now acting arbitrarily. The fundamental requirement of police reforms is to curtail its arbitrariness and bring it under a supervisory body. How can the police claim be an independent body? In democracies, civil law enforcement agencies are not arbitrary force. It is another debate about who should supervise the Police. It may be district administration, the district elected chairman or the offices of judiciary, law or prosecution. Hence, supervision of Police in a district is essential for improving Police functions.

Critics attribute that the independence of the Police means the independence of federal PSP officers. They criticize that PSP is independent of the home department, but the provincial police officers are still employees of the Home department, according to Provincial Rules of business. They call it acute administrative hypocrisy. The proposition clarifies that Federal PSPs only create the voice of police independence for their independence, not those of provincial police employees. It is one of the primary structural anomalies that has always hindered the process of police reforms. It is more astonishing that PSPs are federal civil servants, and they have nothing to do with provincial policing, than how powerful they are that they are dictating the provincial governments to reform Police according to their whims or wishes. It means the interest of the federal PSP is the primary cause for not ensuring the provincial police reforms. The foremost obligation is to reform the Police to cannons of constitution, law, functionality and specialization. 

Progressively, it is essential to dissect the functions and incorporate them into the federal tiers and police specialized cadres. The Federal Republic of Pakistan requires four tiers of federal Police.

1. Federal Police
2. All Pakistan Police
3. Provincial Police
4. District Police

Federal Police must work in the federal domain according to schedule IV of the constitution. The organizations of Islam Abad Police, FIA or the ANF may be parts of the Federal Police. Article 240(a) provides the formation of All Pakistan Service that is common between federation and provinces. CCI is the constitutional domain of raising all Pakistan services. All Pakistan Police must be raised strictly in the domain of CCI. For example, the Railway police should be revamped as an All Pakistan Police, or the CCI can create an All Pakistan police on the eighteen subjects of the CCI. Reservation of posts connected with the affairs of a province can not form an all-Pakistan service. Provincial Police are essential to enforcing provincial laws. Lastly, the provincial assembly and government should raise the district police, primarily for municipal functions on the residuary subjects the provincial assembly may distribute between the provincial and district governments.

The Police perform multiple functions. Hence, it is primarily a civil law enforcement agency. Therefore, it may not deal with the issues of national security and hard-core terrorism. Police will only cooperate with the law enforcement agencies of the Defence Ministry to combat non-civil operations and processes. Hence, it is community police with specific civil coded laws and operations. However, the Police normally perform the following functions.

• Shields life and property through the enforcement of laws & regulations; Proactively patrols assigned areas
• Responds to calls for police service
• Accomplishes preliminary & follow-up criminal and traffic investigations
• Conducts interrogations, interviews and other explanations
• Formulates written reports and field notes of investigations and patrol activities
• Arrest and processes criminals
• Support prosecution and trials
• Testifies in court trials
• Emergency duties are required during adverse weather conditions and other emergencies
• Ability to exercise judgment in determining when to use force and to what degree to enforce or execute a law
• Operate a law enforcement vehicle under emergency conditions day or night to show the writ of a state
• Comprehending legal documents, including citations, affidavits, warrants and other documents.
• Commanding emergency personnel at accident emergencies and disasters
• Takes an active role in Community Oriented Policing on campus
• Self-initiate traffic and criminal investigations.
• Provide support and space to sister law enforcement agencies
• Provide support to combat terrorism and other operations of national security
• organizing processions, licencing and surveillance
• Many more but of civil nature

The critical part of police reformation is establishing specialized police cadres according to the functions of the Police. The cadres must be reciprocal to the functions. Before creating police cadres, it is vital to comprehend that Pakistan is a federation and a security state. Therefore, the compartment of federal and organizational tiers is critical for establishing Police at all levels for all functions. The varied and assorted functions must not form a general cadre of Police as is the case with existing Police establishments. It is the primary reason for the failure of the Police.

Police service is the executing machine of the legislation, delegated legislation, policies and regulations. Thus, the Police service perpetrates regulatory, executing and enforcing tasks and operations. Police service performs characteristic functions according to the purposes of the service. Then, it comprises the police officers performing those functions. Civil servants require individual positions to accomplish the purposes of the Civil Service. Hence, each position is a post. As there are horizontal and vertical positions, a civil service requires a cadre or schedule of posts to perform the functions of the service. Hence, the schedule or cadre of civil service must approximate the specialized functions of the civil service.

What is a post? A post is a position with a specific job description. Accordingly, a post has a respective hierarchical placement with vertical and horizontal precedences according to the Post’s objectives in executing laws and policies. Hence, Post is an official position with a specific job description۔ it’s a sort of paid employment in which a person is placed on duty for carrying out a particular functional activity۔

What is a cadre? A cadre is generally a collection of analogous posts in nature. However, these similar posts to execute the objectives of a civil service may vary in hierarchy or division. Cadre means a separate functional unit of civil service. Hence, cadre means a group of posts or a part of such group sanctioned as a separate unit of an organization or a department.

Progressive compilation of cadre is the primary cause of police reforms. Consequently, cadre formation quality is directly proportional to the executing objectives of a civil service formed under specific execution plans. Reforming a cadre of civil service is the fundamental objective of civil service reforms. Civil service reformers must comprehend the cadre scheme of civil service. Civil service’s whole concept and structure are implementing and executing the law and policies. Therefore, the placement of posts into a cadre is vital for the executing functionality of a civil service. Then, the proposition raises a fundamental question. Why and how should the posts be placed in a cadre or civil service schedule?

The Post, cadre, Service and subject alignment are indispensable for the execution of laws and policies. Thus, posts must be identical in substance, edifice, structure and construction. As the execution and implementation of the subject relating to schedule IV of the constitution through legislation, delegated legislation and policies are concerned; so, the posts comprising the cadre must incorporate the substance and motif of the cadre, service and subjects. A cadre is a functional unit and must have applicable posts. Irrelevant and non-functional posts in a cadre shall create a functional obstruction for the civil service. Thus, it is inevitable to place functional posts in the cadre of Civil Service to meet the objectives of civil service. Reforming the cadre means putting up those posts which enhance the alignment & functional capacity of the service. Erratic & irrelevant posts must be separate from a cadre. It must comprise exact posts of the same nature.

What is a general cadre? It simply means compiling a cadre with different, distinct and erratic posts. It means the reservation of posts belonging to various organizations and departments. Furthermore, it also includes the federal, provincial and local posts in a cadre. Hence, the general cadre creates structural and constitutional anomalies. The civil services in Pakistan comprise general cadres, which is the primary reason for dysfunctional civil services. What is a scheme for the reservation of posts? This scheme allows a specific cadre of service to reserve posts of other cadres or services in order to absorb all the lucrative posts. This reservation of posts can extend to all federal, provincial, and local government departments. The scheme’s objective is to control all tiers of the government to create a centralized cartel that is unaccountable to organizations, governments and people. For example, the Pakistan Police Service (PSP) cadre represents the same scheme to control the policing of federal, provincial and local governments. The method enables PSP to be federal and provincial heads of police organizations alongside deputy and assistant superintendents of police at district and even at tehsil levels. This colonial scheme renders grave legal, administrative and constitutional infringements. British incorporated the scheme in the constitution of 1935 through article 246, but Pakistan never incorporated it. 

The scheme halts the proficiency of the organizations because a general cadre of lucrative posts is established on their posts. The purpose of the general cadre is to control organizations and develop a fast mode of vertical mobility. PSP has developed a general cadre so that each PSP officer reaches the zenith of grade 22, despite compromising organizational autonomy, federalism and constitution. The General cadre of PSP is the primary reason not to establish specialized police services. Then, the provincial police services of provincial employees and others also comprise general cadres. Hence, these general cadre services have become dysfunctional owing to the specialized nature of tasks in modern administrative governance.

What is a specialized cadre? A specialized cadre comprises the posts of a specialized agency, institution or department. The cluster of posts is similar, comparable and equivalent. Generally, the posts belong to the exact agency, organization or department. Specialized cadres must replace the general cadres. Police reformers must focus on the specialization of cadres. It is the primary requisite to reform the civil services. The compilation and selection of functional posts into a cadre of civil service is the hallmark of an effective civil service reforms initiative. Then, there is also a difference between a specialized cadre and a specialized police bureaucracy. Either general or specialized, the civil servants shall remain civil servants. General and specialized civil servants are the same product. The difference is only the administrative recruitment, training, skill and work application. The Civil Service in Pakistan primarily requires specialized cadres. If specialized cadres are in place, they shall follow the specialized police bureaucracy. Hence, the formulation of specialized cadres is the prerequisite of police service reforms.

Then, there needs to be more clarity about specialized police Services. The police cadre management can learn from the general civil services how to reform the specialized police cadres. The cadre management of all civil services including police is the same. Likewise, In most public departments, specialized administrative wings exist, and engineers, doctors, or professionals are heading these wings. For example, in the health department, there is an administrative secretary along with a technical or specialized director general of health services. However, the problem is that they need help to perform the administrative-specialized functions of the department. The secretary lacks technical skills, and the DG lacks administrative skills. It requires a person who has both technical and administrative skills. Therefore, medical administrators should be the civil servants of the health department. Neither a doctor nor a generalist civil servant is the specialized person to perform the administrative-technical functions of the health department. Therefore, specialized cadres are critical to ensure specialized bureaucracy. Hence, specialized civil services mean creating specialized cadres of specialized administrators. The multiple police specialized cadres can be formed on the exact analogy.

The other substantial part of cadre management is the admission, mobility and dismissal from the cadre. It is an essential part of civil service reforms. Civil Service Reforms must provide a competitive and transparent mode to enter and leave the cadre. Therefore, entry into a civil service cadre must be competitive. The promotion, absorption, transfer, deputation or other entry modes into a cadre must assimilate transparent competition. Then, tier vertical mobility must also be competitive. Each step of vertical mobility must have competitive modes of vertical mobility. Specialized cadres in place of general cadres shall make more professional administrators in the police Service. Then, the dismissal of civil servants from the cadre is critical for the smooth functioning of cadre objectives. The only way to purge the cadre of corrupt, inefficient and unproductive civil servants is to ensure vertical mobility on competition and transparency. All those who fail the standards of vertical mobility must be dismissed, and promotions might replace them in the cadre. Hence, cadre management is the elemental prerequisite of the Civil Service’s functionality.

Distribution of posts vertically and horizontally in a cadre for service mobility is the hallmark of service delivery: The processes of encaderization, rationalization, distribution, upgradation, and proportional division of posts are vital for civil service reforms. If the process of police service reforms cannot reform the cadre management of the posts, it simply means the process is defective and inefficient. Hence, rule concerning the cadre management of civil service is paramount to police service reforms.

Hence, the functions of the Police require the establishment of specialized cadres of investigation, prosecution, traffic, operations, municipality, surveillance and intelligence and others. The general cadre of Police must be replaced with specialized cadres to executive the functions efficiently and diligently.

The coded law of the Police requires reformation. The police reforms require two fundamental pieces of legislation. The first part of the legislation requires establishing federal, All Pakistan, Provincial and Municipal police. The establishment of police tiers and cadres is the constitutional obligation of Article 240 of the constitution. Then, the other part is regarding legislation of functions of the Police. Most significantly, the legislation must be strictly according to schedule IV of the constitution, read with articles 142 and 242. The legislation of functions should be distinct from the constitutional boundaries of the different tiers of the federation. 

  In the legal context, codification is collecting and restating a jurisdiction’s legislation in prescribed areas, commonly by matter, into a law framework, like a codex or book of the law. In civil law approaches, codification is a compulsory element. Codification revises administrative and judicial discretions into statutory law in common law systems. With this characterization, civil law countries depend on codification processes.

It simply means to code or writes the law of discretion. Written laws are critical in the countries like Pakistan, which are maturing as nation-states. Coded or written law helps to remove inconsistencies, contradictions, and ambiguities in the legal system; hence, codification is essential for the rule of law. Professionals and the general public benefit from codification since it provides a unified source of information that is easily accessible and implementable. Thus, codification is gathering rules or laws to construct a logical code. Codification is a technique for converting judicial or administrative decisions or pertinent laws into codified law. Typically, the approach does not lead to the production of a new law. It codifies existing law, which is customarily by subject. The coded law of the Police must be re-coded to form the functional law scheme. The PPC and scheduled offences of special laws need functional incorporation with all types of criminal procedures. Yet, there is a need to revamp the general criminal procedure of 1898 to the functions and fundamental rights of the constitution. Hence, codifying all police laws is a vital step for police reforms in Pakistan.

The organization of Police offices is essential for the functionality of the Police. The vertical organizational tiers are imperative. Proportional resource distribution to the offices is also vital for the administration of the police. The primary unit of the police is the police station, headed by the station house officer (SHO), followed by the offices of SDPO, SP, DIG and IG. Interestingly, the police station is the only functional unit, whereas all other teams are merely supervisory. It is so bizarre that so many supervisory offices can not regulate the only available office of the police station. Hence, the SHO is the most corrupt person arguably. Then, what are supervisory offices doing? If so many supervisory offices can not regulate an SHO, why are they in place? Police reforms need the equitable distribution of powers and responsibilities amongst all tiers of police organizations. The functional unit of SHO may be the category IV officer of finance management. The financial independence of SHO is critical for the mobility of police at a lower level. Functional Police can not afford so many administrative or supervisory offices. The SP, SSP and DIG must also do investigations, operational actions and perform other functions of policing. It will help to change the thana culture, which is a police slang now. Hence, reorganizing all tiers of police organizations is critical for the functionality of the Police.

The reforming terms and conditions of the Police service is the vital organ of police reform. The Federal PSPs have one of the best career paths in Pakistan. Instead, the whole police system revolves around making sure that each PSP reaches the zenith of grade 22. I would like to point out that there are almost 800 PSP officers and nearly four lacs provincial Police employees. Tragically, there is no career path for the four lacs local police force. How can the Police function when most of the police force does not have any career path? If the government wants to have genuine police reforms, the priority must be the officials than the officers. Reforming the terms and conditions of the official employees of the police force is a critical part of police reform. How can state and society expect police officials to perform functions or even to remain courteous with the people when they are not promoted for years? The form works on a principle to firstly award and then expect. Without a career path for provincial employees, the police reforms remain an eyewall. The class system in the Police is against the fundamental rights of the constitution. If the state and society want to reform Police, they must ensure the abolition of the class system. The specialised comparative agencies of Police must not have a class system.

Hence, police reform is a comprehensive and complex federal form of governance initiative. It requires all social, political and administrative players to form a joint coalition to reform the Police. The five rules of reformation, including those of constitutional alignment, structural alignment, coded law, cadre management and improving terms and conditions of services, are critical for reforming the Police.