—Mofazzal Karim—

In recent weeks, newspapers have been flooded with reports of murder, rape, robbery, extortion, land grabbing, and other crimes. The surge of such reports is so overwhelming that calling a daily newspaper a ‘crime bulletin’ rather than a ‘news platform’ would hardly be an exaggeration. Naturally, readers expect to stay informed about national and international affairs—not just to read about horrific crimes, tragic road accidents, or a struggling father losing everything to a mugger.

The rising crime rate has led many to point fingers at law enforcement agencies. During the turbulent months of July and August last year, the police force found itself in a state of disarray, causing a severe morale crisis among its field-level personnel. However, swift government intervention and decisive leadership at the top have significantly improved the situation. In any disciplined force, morale is its lifeblood—when it breaks, even the most heavily armed force becomes paralysed.

The previous government misused the police force, deploying it against innocent civilians, which severely damaged its morale. Fortunately, this situation has now improved. However, any discussion on law and order in Bangladesh must address a key institution—the field administration. Despite the changing political landscape, our administrative framework remains largely unchanged from the British colonial model implemented nearly 300 years ago.

The British colonial rulers, in turn, had adopted and modified the Mughal governance structure. Even after independence, we continue to function under this system, with only minor modifications. The administrative setup of districts, sub-divisions (now upazilas), and police stations remains largely unchanged since the British departed in 1947. The Deputy Commissioner (DC), formerly known as the District Magistrate, remains the central figure in district administration, responsible for land revenue, law enforcement, and coordinating development activities.

As the government’s chief representative in the district, the Deputy Commissioner is considered the ‘symbol of administration’. Whenever a major incident occurs, the central government first seeks reports from the DC. In matters of law and order or political sensitivity, their statement becomes the government’s stance. Their role has remained constant through the decades.

Drawing from my experience as a sub-divisional officer in the 1960s, as well as my roles in several districts and as a divisional commissioner in Rajshahi, I wish to highlight key issues concerning field-level law enforcement. The recent nationwide protests over the rape and death of a child in Magura reflect a natural public outrage. The involvement of students in such protests reassures me that injustice and inequality will not go unchallenged, and the rule of law will soon be firmly established.

However, protesters must remember that capturing criminals, preventing crimes, and addressing violence against women are primarily the responsibilities of field-level law enforcement officers—not ministers, secretaries, or top bureaucrats in Dhaka. Calling for the resignation of high-ranking officials may not be the most effective demand. Instead, holding the entire administration accountable—from the top to the bottom—would ensure greater vigilance.

Field-level criminals—thieves, gangsters, rapists, and extortionists—closely monitor the activities of local law enforcement officers, including the Officer-in-Charge (OC), Superintendent of Police (SP), Deputy Commissioner (DC), and Upazila Nirbahi Officer (UNO). If they notice internal conflicts, a lack of coordination, or officers prioritising personal gain over duty, they seize the opportunity to commit crimes with impunity. Criminals quickly learn how to manipulate the system, ensuring they evade justice.

Two key figures—the Deputy Commissioner (DC) and the Superintendent of Police (SP)—must always remember that they are under constant public scrutiny. The way they interact, whether they maintain mutual respect or display hostility, is always noticed by the public. Effective coordination between them ensures smooth decision-making and enforcement. The same applies to UNOs and OCs at the upazila level. If they fail to cooperate, their subordinates will hesitate to implement orders, leading to administrative paralysis.

Successful district administration requires strong public engagement. The DC and SP must actively seek cooperation from local representatives and community leaders. These individuals, being sons of the soil, possess invaluable knowledge about the district’s issues and people. No matter how experienced an administrator may be, they should rely on the insights of respected local figures—be it a teacher, politician, businessman, or landowner. However, they must be cautious to keep fraudsters and opportunists at bay.

During my tenure as DC of Kushtia in 1974, the district was plagued by crime and lawlessness. My approach was to visit communities, deliver speeches, and encourage unity against violence. These public meetings, conducted in collaboration with local leaders, played a crucial role in curbing crime. Within three to four months, we managed to restore peace in the district.

A DC, SP, and all senior district officials must uphold integrity in their roles. Public support is essential for administrative success, and without it, no initiative will thrive. Corruption-free leadership ensures that the administration earns public trust, which in turn fosters effective law enforcement.

As a former public servant, I urge on Saturday DCs and SPs to revive the spirit of duty and service. Can they not, inspired by the spirit of July and August, transform the field administration into a people-centric force? Can they not work together to eradicate the rising wave of crime? I believe that if they unite with determination, they can swiftly rein in lawlessness. This is not just my expectation—it is the expectation of an entire nation.