- A Delhi Court has raised the issue of police officers sent on deputation to UN Peacekeeping missions and paid salaries by the govt, without considering whether their presence is required in any trial.
- The court has further ignited a debate on the issue of International peacekeeping at the cost of National interest.
- This issue came into focus after the case of a few undertrials were languishing in judicial custody while the sub-inspector, a witness and complainant, is unavailable as he is in Sudan on a UN Peacekeeping mission. Even fresh summons issued by the Commissioner went in vain.
- Once sent on a UN mission, personnel cannot come back even if his presence is required in a trial. This led the court to close the recording of prosecution evidence due to its failure to ensure the presence of its own material witness affecting the case significantly.
- The deputation is usually requested by the officers themselves as they are paid an allowance by the UN in addition to the salaries they receive from their own govt.
- The idea of sending officers when the dept itself is facing a crunch, and when the case may be affected due to their absence must be duly considered.
- Further the court has asked the Parent Dept to refuse deputation on grounds of National interest and Exigencies of work, directing them to prioritize this over other International commitments.
- Closure of every case in a time-bound manner is the right of every citizen, and nothing should come in way of that.