Daily Times

The callous killing of a man in Karachi by a Sindh Ranger has been met with public anger and agitation. Reports say the man was killed during an altercation between him and his wife on a street. The Ranger was apparently stationed in a kiosk, from where he had a clear view of the fracas, and fired on the husband, killing him and injuring the wife. Rangers officials say the man was beating his wife and trying to drag her into a car when Rangers personnel intervened thinking it was a kidnapping. During the ensuing scuffle, one of the Rangers stationed at the kiosk tried to shoot the man in the leg but hit him in the neck instead. While police struggle to make sense of what happened in their investigation, the episode has again shone a spotlight on the efficacy of the Rangers in Karachi. This is the latest incident in which Rangers personnel have fired on and killed innocent individuals posing no threat. Last year a taxi and another car driver were killed without explanation, and few people can forget the horrific murder in 2011 of a teenager who begged for his life before being shot point blank by two Rangers. That confrontation was caught on film and public outcry led to the conviction of the Rangers personnel. The family and friends of yesterday’s victim are now demanding the same.

The question is why the Rangers interfered in a situation that required policing. The explanation of a possible kidnapping is not good enouigh when the Rangers could have subdued him using less than lethal force. However, Rangers are not trained to use less than lethal force; as a paramilitary organisation tasked with patrolling the borders, the Rangers have a military mindset — ‘shoot first and ask questions later’ is essential to their training. This is not what is required to police cities. Karachi’s law enforcement troubles are severe. However, they can only be solved using the police, given the sprawling nature of the city that puts criminals and terrorists cheek-by-jowl with ordinary residents. Rangers are not inclined to make that distinction and given their history in Karachi, have a deserved reputation for being trigger-happy. Would a policeman in that situation have shot the man in question? It is doubtful, even considering the inefficient nature of Pakistan’s police. A diligent police officer would have determined the identities of the people in question after intervening to stop the argument.

What is needed is a review of the strategy of using paramilitary forces to control urban lawlessness instead of properly training and equipping the police to do so. The Karachi police are hopelessly undermanned and need to be properly equipped. The biggest obstacle to them doing their job effectively is political interference from vested interests and political parties tearing the city apart in turf wars. Police regularly apprehend criminals only to receive a call demanding his release. Government statistics notwithstanding, the presence of Rangers and an ongoing operation in the city have done little to ameliorate crime or improve security. This tells us that Karachi’s problems are structural and political and can’t be solved by using brute force. Either the Rangers should be trained specifically to take up policing duties, given their continuous 15-year presence in the city, or the police should be armed with the backing to do the job they are trained for. *