Royal Bhutan Police.

Opposition Party Against Police Frisking Youth

Despite concerns raised by the opposition party that frisking youth after 10pm would be equal to the suspension of freedom of movement and criminalisa- tion of youth, the Royal Bhutan Police (RBP) will continue the already enforced measure.

The opposition leader, Dr Pema Gyamtsho, in a letter sub- mitted to the home minister yes- terday, asked for a review of the measure and consideration of alternative ways to reduce youth related crimes.
The police introduced the measure, which was announced in a press conference last week, to address increasing incidents of battery or violent incidents involving youth.
RBP media liaison officer, Major Chogyel, said that the Civil and Criminal Procedure Code (CCPC) already gives the police the right to stop and frisk persons.
As per chapter 8, section 166 of the code, a police officer can upon reasonable suspicion of in- volvement in a criminal offense, stop a person moving about at odd hours in a public place, and a person who cannot give a sat- isfactory account of him/herself.
Major Chogyel said that the police will continue to frisk youth because of the increasing number of youth crime and the type of weapons involved.
Under the new measure, po- lice are frisking youth in groups of two or more found after 10pm.
During the press confer- ence, the police chief also said that individuals could also be frisked if police personnel find them behaving suspiciously. The police would like to see two further measures imple- mented, one is a ban on the sale of knives to youth, and the other is a time restriction to prevent youth loitering late at night. However, for this they require the approval of the home ministry. Major Chogyel said that the
proposal has been submitted and that the police will await directives. In its letter to the home ministry, the opposition party while acknowledging the “good intent” of the measure, warns that there will be “serious reper- cussions” on the moral, dignity, and self esteem of the youth. The opposition party also cautions that the measure cre- ates a high possibility of law enforcement personnel resort- ing to “overzealous application” and “use of excessive force”. The party states that this would damage existing “good will and cordial relations” between the youth and police created through the Police-Youth Part- nership Program (PYPP).
There are a little more than 5,700 students signed up for PYPP, not inclusive of youth who volunteer during major events.
The opposition party also questioned whether the meas- ure would have a positive out- come. It argued that the meas- ure would instead demoralise the youth, alienate them from society, and breed unnecessary resentment, fear and mistrust in law enforcement agencies. “In essence, it would tantamount to suspension of freedom of move- ment and criminalisation of our youth.”
The party instead recom- mends strict enforcement of ex- isting laws like closing bars and entertainment establishments on time, age limit for entry and sale of alcohol in such establish- ments, sale and distribution of drugs and other substances, inspection at entrances of pub- lic events and facilities, among others. It also recommends strong advocacy and awareness programs.
According to police statis- tics, 70 schools including more than 83,000 students have been sensitised so far.
Public opinion has been divided on the measure.
One camp of thought is that the measure is an invasion of privacy and that it could lead to other measures in the name of security. “At the first look even I thought it was an excel- lent approach by the RBP but what about the negative long term consequences of such stop and frisk,” wrote Pema Thinley on social media. “If a police man walks up to you and suddenly starts frisking you on
the basis of suspicion, wouldn’t you feel humiliated, disgusted and above all wouldn’t you feel your right to privacy being vio- lated?,” he asked.

Courtesy source from Kuensel dated February 18, 2015.

Posted on:18 February,2015