MURDER OF STEPHEN LAWRENCE IN LONDON-
CAN THE GOVERNMENT AND THE POLICE IN GUJARAT LEARN SOME LESSONS?
Stephens Lawrence was a bright 18-year-old young man. On April 22, 1993 he was waiting at a bus stand at 10.30 PM in south-east London to go home. Suddenly, a group of about five to six youngsters came across the street, shouting “what, what nigger”, attacked and stabbed him to death
The attack was completely unprovoked. Stephen was killed just because he was black. His murderers were white.
The Metropolitan Police Service, London conducted investigations in two phases.
Names of five white young delinquents came repeatedly to the notice of the police as prime suspects, including specific information of their involvement in murder. The police, however, failed to unearth sufficient evidence to prosecute them.
What was remarkable about this case was the huge dignity, courage and determination with which Stephen’s parents pursued the case. Their campaign for justice finally bore fruit when the UK Government appointed a Commission of Inquiry on July 31, 1997 under the chairmanship of Sir William Macpherson of Cluny, former Judge of the High Court, to inquire into matters arising from the death of Stephen Lawrence, particularly to identify the lessons to be learnt for the investigation and prosecution of racially motivated crimes.
The report submitted by the Commission to the Government in February, 1999 was a scathing indictment of the working of the Metropolitan Police service. The Commission identified many deficiencies in investigation and came to the conclusion that “the investigation was marred by a combination of professional incompetence, institutional racism and a failure of leadership by senior officers.” The Commission stated that institutional racism “exists both in the Metropolitan Police Service and in other Police Services and other institutions country wide.”
The Commission made 70 wide-ranging recommendations. They recommended that a Ministerial Priority be established for all police services to increase trust and confidence in policing among minority communities. The Freedom of Information Act should apply to all areas of policing, subject only to “substantial harm” test for withholding disclosure. Race Relations legislation should be extended to police and the chiefs should be made vicariously liable for acts and omissions of their officers relevant to that legislation. A comprehensive system of reporting and recording of all racist incidents and crimes should be created by making it possible for public to report them 24 hours a day and at locations other than police stations. A model manual of investigation into racist incidents and reviews of such investigations, which should be open and thorough, should be prepared. Dedicated and trained Family Liaison Officers must exist at local level in every police force. Training must be given to police in racism awareness at local levels and local minority ethnic communities should be involved in such training. The police forces must reflect the cultural and ethnic mix of the communities they serve. Racist words and acts spoken or done by the police should lead to disciplinary proceedings. Serious complaints against the police should be independently investigated.
How did the police and the government in the UK react to the findings? The police admitted that their investigations were faulty. Sir Paul Condon, the Metropolitan Police Commissioner, made a public apology to the parents: “I, we in the Met, feel a sense of shame for the incompetence of that first investigation and of how the family were let down. We could and we should have done better.” The report was submitted to the Government on February 15, 1999 and it was discussed in the House of Commons on February 24, 1999. Sir Jack Straw, the British Home Secretary, announced: “ The House will share my sense of shame that the criminal justice system, and the Metropolitan Police in particular, failed the Lawrence family so badly.” The Government announced its acceptance of all the recommendations and formulated an action plan to implement them within a given timeframe
What does the above reveal? A murder takes place. A very reputed police force handles the investigation badly. The revelation gives a big jolt to the collective conscience of the community. No attempt is made to suppress facts. Public apologies for institutional failures are made by the head of the police force and also by the government. The existence of the problem is recognised. Solutions are suggested, accepted and implementation starts.
And how do we react? As per the official count, more than 800 people are butchered on the streets of Ahmedabad and other places in Gujarat. The police do not register FIRs in all cases. They act partisan and fail to deal with rioters effectively. There is in fact evidence of their complicity in various crimes. The Commissioner of Police explains the partisan attitudes of his men by referring to the fact that they are bound to be affected by the general sentiments of the community. The head of the government refers to Newton’s laws to explain the reaction of the majority community. No apologies are offered by the government or by the head of the police force for their failure to protect the lives and properties of citizens. The guilty police officers and others appear to be getting away scot free.
What happened in Gujarat has happened earlier, not only in that state but in other places too. It will keep on happening in future, till our governments and the police forces realise that good, open, decent and neutral policing is the key to our survival as a democratic society, which is so heterogeneous in its composition and culture.
(Original version of the article published in the Indian Express dated 03.06.2002).
