Day: December 20, 2021

Anil Puri CMD, APS group A first generation serial entrepreneur, thought leader and an action catalyzer rolled into one – Anil Puri is a rare combination of a visionary, an innovator and a strategic thinker. He has used this combination to innovate and implement on-ground many new business ideas. His rich experience in various businesses has enabled him to nurture & mentor innovative ideas and scale them up. Introduction The interpretations, connotations and comprehensions about the ‘only public’ character of security is undergoing metamorphosis. A large part of this change is attributed to the phenomenal rise of private security. In the recent past, the private security has witnessed a rapid growth both in terms of quantity as well as quality. A host of factors are responsible for this including – cost, accessibility, flexibility, perception of security and the limitations of public security. Private security has provided many security seekers with a 24×7 kind of reliable and cost-effective option for safeguarding their life as well as property. The internal security in India has been marred by the feelings of all pervasive deep ‘insecurity’ amongst the citizens on account of innumerable challenges. The challenges include persistent terrorist activities, growing spatial spread and consolidation of Naxalism, simmering social fault-lines of caste, religion, gender, ethnicity, region and language, crisis of governance including the failure of Police to enforce the rule of law; rising crime rate; dilatory and ineffective criminal justice system and politicized and unprofessional approach of Police. It is pertinent to mention here that shortage of manpower is one of the key factors hampering the public security in overcoming these challenges. The heightened threat perceptions emanating from terrorism and other disruptive issues have also pushed individuals and companies to look for tailor-made and reliable security beyond public security. No wonder, the number of private security agencies and private security personnel have increased manifold. The growth is also visible in terms of foray of private security agencies into multiple sectors including banks, industries, education, hospitals, hotels, shopping malls and airports around the world. In case of certain agencies, a great deal of specialization has also been seen. Private investments in security continue to expand and public/ private partnerships of myriad types proliferate, even as budgets for public policing stall or decline. Current Shape of the Relationship The boundary between public and private security is messy and complex. Police executives deal with some aspect of it almost every day. The police and private security, both function in order to provide security. The orientation, though, is different on account of public law enforcement functions being society- or community-oriented, whereas private security functions are essentially client-oriented. In this context while the public police acted in the public interest, private police acted for private interests that were often, if not always, at odds with the public interest. Further, there are limitations on private security personnel in terms of the possession and exercise of police powers – that is, the power of arrest. These differences, however, do not wean us away from realizing that for the sake of security at large, their roles should be complementary in nature. A state-centred view saw order maintenance as a quintessential function of government. In recent decades, a laissez faire view has emerged that celebrates ‘private-public partnerships’ and sees private policing as an industry providing both a service and a public benefit. Public law enforcement and private security agencies should work closely together, because their respective roles are complementary in the effort to control crime. Indeed, the magnitude of the nation’s crime problem should preclude any form of competition between the two. In spite of the emphasis on the advantages of working together and complimentary roles of the police and private security, there are issues of concern between the two causing strains in their relationship. However, continued growth in the private sector has forced the two sides to coexist. PSARA 2005, Central Model Rules 2020 and Rules framed by the State Govt. The Private Security Agencies (Regulation) Act, 2005 through its provisions have also established the framework for relationship between the two agenciesthe police and private security. 4th clause of Section 7, Section 9, Section 10, Clause (1) sub clause (l) of Section 13, Clause (1), Clause (2) and Clause (3) of Section 18 and Section 21 of the Act need special mention. A look at the subsequent Rules framed by the Union as well as State Governments also reveal that there is a lot of interface between the police and private security on account of these aspects. This framework attempts to regulate the private security agencies as well as their personnel and controlling authority as well as police have been given powers in this regard. The private security agencies have raised concerns and fears of being over regulated, but when compared to the previous un-regulated era, one can easily comprehend that for the sake of standards, regulation is essential. Barriers in the Relationship As mentioned earlier, despite common goals of security and manifold benefits of cooperating, the police and private security have several issues of concern causing strains in their relationship. There is a feeling that these issues have resulted on account of misconceptions and lack of understanding about each other: Lack of mutual respect. Lack of communication. Lack of law enforcement knowledge of private security. Perceived competition between the two on the common turf of security. Lack of standards for private security personnel. Perceived corruption of police. Jurisdictional conflict. False alarm rates. Looking ahead, there is a possibility of some challenges continuing and others emerging in the context of relationship between the two. These challenges include permitting private security to enter into the areas hither to meant only for Police; understanding of the roles of each other, evolving coordination mechanisms between the two and level of arming the private security along with the requisite training balancing the public interest vis-à-vis private interest in the domain of security. It may sound radical in our context at this juncture, but five forms…