Solution : what can citizens do to improve India's police dept?
Steps 1-3 : The citizens of India should force Panchayat Members, MLAs and MPs to following laws :
LM.01 ,
LM.02 ,
LM.03. These laws would enable citizens to take subsquent steps.
Steps 4-6 : The citizens should pass laws to enact procedures
CT.05 ,
CT.06 and
CT.07. These procedures will create a Jury System in lower courts, highe courts and supreme courts. The Jurors have no vices which result into atrocities, and so their presence will reduce atrocities.
Steps 7-9 : The citizens should pass laws to enact procedures
CT.10 ,
CT.13 and
CT.15. These procedures Will enable citizens to elect/expel judges in lower courts, high courts and supreme courts. This will further restrain judges from comiting atrocities, and so atrocities will reduce.
These TRIVIAL steps will reduce judocratic atrocities in India.
Why are judocratic atrocities in US rising?
The judocratic atrocities in US are rising day by day.
The judges impose exteremely long prison sentences and huge fines for minor crimes. Consider minor crimes, likes possessing a few milligram of cocaine, which is a vice, and not even a crime. The judges are imposing prison sentences of several years, such as 7-10 years. Or consider crimes like prostitution or frequenting a prosititute, which again is a mere vice and not even a crime. It is becoming increasingly common to impose prison sentence and huge financial fines.
Why are more and more judges in US becoming "prison-happy", like some policemen become "trigger happy"?
Consider Federal judges. The Federal judges are appointed by the President and become judge AFTER over majority of Senators approve. Easier said than done, as Presidents and Senators in US have deep nexuses with CEOs and Directors of huge companies. IOW, the Presidents are more likely to select those persons for judgeships, which the CEOs recommend, and Senators will approve only if several CEOs also approve the judgeships.
As a result, a large number of junior Federal judges and many state judges who want to become senior Federal judges do what the CEOs want them to do, so that the CEOs/directors of big companies woul lobby them. But then why would this increase prison sentences?
Enter the prison owning companies and banks etc which own these companies. The prisons in US are run privately. And the prison-owning companies make huge profits. So more the prisoners, more the profits. And longer the sentences, more the profits. To ensure and increase the profits, the prison owning companies' CEOs want judges to convict more and more accused, be innocent or guilty, and impose longer and longer sentences, whether crime is minor or major. Essentially, the prison owning companies' CEOs/executives lobby heavily in favor if candidates who have a track record of convicting more and more persons and issuing longer and longer sentences. And the prison owning companies CEOs also heavily campaign AGAINST those candidates who have liberal track records.
IOW, the judges and prison-owning companies have group-group nexuses. There is NO individual level nexuses, like a prison owning company-owner giving bribes to a judge for longer sentence. But as a group, the CEOs of prison-owning companies have one policy implicitly explicit --- the judges who impose longer/more sentences will be helped and those who impose fewer/shorter sentences will be lobbied against. The judges have got the cue --- and have become prison happy.
The Jury System has been circumvented, as the judges filter out the individuals who are likely to acquit. How? Say a person has committed a crime. The judge will summon say 100-120 citizens for Jury Duty. In the name of impartiality, the judge will interview, and weed out 50-100 individuals who are likely to acquit the accused. So remaing ones are those who are more likely to convict, and hence judge ensures a conviction. Example : consider trials related to drugs, prostitution etc. Over 50% Americans DO NOT aggree that non-violent addicts (or even dealers) should be thrown into prisons. And over 80% disagree with long prison sentences for addicts/peddlers. So if the sample is unfiltered, it would be impossible to get a Jury who will recomment imprisonment for drugs. But the judge will typically choose 100-150 persons, filter out 80-120 who believe that "taking drugs should NOT result into prison sentence". Thus judges ensure a conviction.
The other trick the judges play is that they prohibit the Jurors to decide the prison sentence. Very few Jurors, if asked, would approve several years of prison sentence for possssing, taking and even selling drugs, or indulging into prostitution. The judge will ONLY allow Jurors to answer the question such as "did this person carry drug". To this, the Jurors would answer as they think, which may be YES.And bingo ... the judge would promptly impose a long long sentence.
Solution? The solution for this problems is for Americans to decide. But how can we ensure that such things do NOT happen in India? IOW, how can we ensure that our courts will NOT impose long sentences for minor crimes? Simple --- the length of sentences should be decided by Jurors and NOT by the judges. The Jurors are nexusless, have no career motive, and so would NOT impose long sentences to fill the prisons and fill the vaults of prison owning companies.
If you have any questions, please mail it to MehtaRahulC@yahoo.com. Thousand thanks in advance.
