Janamaithri Suraksha Project - Kerala Police

taking the feedback from the field functionaries. It is an example of prudency in policy making. Once
the pilots became successful, the scheme was extended to other police stations in the state, from
twenty to two hundred and forty eight at present. Simultaneously planning for resource augmentation
and scaling up during the implementation phase shows the foresight of the policy entrepreneurs.
During the period of scaling up, the policy got the acceptance of all the actors and underwent the
process of refinement. ‘Implementation is beset with agency problem.’ The agent (field functionaries)
may not always act according to the interest and instructions of the principal (the police department
or the government). Guidance, mentoring, aid and support to the field functionaries addressed the
agency problem in Kerala. Exercising good old superintendence and control, periodically reviewing
and issuing clarifications are meant to ensure that the ‘intent’ and ‘design’ of the policy conforms to
the implementation. The government of Kerala appointed a senior police officer as State Level Nodal
Officer who continues as such since the pre-implementation phase with a mandate to review, control
and monitor the scheme. A policy process is a series of thoughts and actions that produce a policy
decision. Analysis, approval and acceptance are the ‘3As’ of the processes. The Janamaithri as a
public policy finally got the seal of approval of all political parties by engaging them in the decision
making process. In fact, the first twenty pilot police stations were selected keeping in mind the fact
that half of the pilot projects fell under the constituency of opposition legislators.
1.5.3 Impact Phase
Field study and research throws light on the impact of the Janamaithri scheme in terms of
community specific advantages, police specific benefits and shared benefits. Community specific
advantages include mobilization and empowerment of communities to identify and respond to
concerns affecting the community, increase in positive attitude towards police, reduced fear of crime
and greater sense of security. Some of the police-specific benefits are improved community-police
relationship, leveraging on community resources, empowerment of front-line officers. Shared benefits
are those accrued to both the community and the police, viz, a decreased potential for police-citizen
conflict, a better flow of information between police and community, prevention of crime. Sample
respondents from the community across the board have emphasised that their sense of security
has increased, the neighbourhood has become safer and there has been reduction in crime. They
felt that police is ‘just a call’s away’. Janamaithri placed special emphasis on the vulnerable and
senior citizens. Frequency of ‘house visits’ of the community police officers to the elderly dependent
couple is more than to ordinary house-holds. This has resulted in heightened sense of security for
the elderly and vulnerable people. Police has also addressed the concern of the community for nonavailability
of basic municipal services. The outcome: positive attitude of the community towards the
police. Police on its part has leveraged on the resources of the community for its own advantage. The
community police officers are mostly the lower level, front-line police personnel with low motivation
and initiatives. The Janamaithri scheme has provided them with much needed recognition in the
organisation and has made them part of the decision making process. The senior field functionaries
like the Station House Officers have acted on the valuable feedback of the community police officers
and succeeded in either preventing or detecting crimes. The community police officer plays the role
of the ‘linking pin’ between the community and the police station, hitherto remained an exclusive
prerogative of the senior police functionaries or the influential member of the locality or of the political
functionaries. The new ‘linking pin’ organisational structure has not only empowered the frontline
police functionaries, but the community at large has benefited from such arrangements by dispensing
with via media to approach the police at the time of need. This will also make the police more
accountable to the people it is meant to serve. The ‘agenda setting’ of the policy processes started
with this premises of the Police Performance and Accountability Commission of Kerala in the year
2005. The role of police is likely to be more proactive as opposed to a reactive organisation, one of the
core philosophies of community policing. By integrating community policing strategies into the
organisational structure and culture, the community, the policemen and the police organisation will
be empowered, setting in the paradigm shift in the vision statement of the police.
1.6 Challenges
In practice, Community Policing does not develop according to a single one dimensional
process: Several factors such as a lack of political and management support, management
priorities, low trust coefficient between olice and public, internal communication problems, shortage
of police capacity and resources, agency problems may hamper or may even set back the
development of Community Policing. The variables enlisted under the context column in the preimplementation
phase in the context-process-outcome matrix - political will, negative mindset of
15