The open public hearings and public complaint forums organized by the leadership of Punjab Police appear, on the surface, to be a means of delivering justice. In reality, however, they have become a labyrinth where obtaining justice depends not on merit or entitlement, but on sheer luck. Police officers are required not only to perform their departmental duties but also to remain mindful of the protocols of higher authorities and various centers of power.
The structure of the system operates in such a way that a constable receives briefings from the station officer, the station officer from the SHO, the SHO from the DSP, the DSP from the SP, the SP from the DIG, while the DIG and the Inspector General remain occupied with high-level meetings. Alongside this, there are separate protocol obligations and meetings at the Chief Minister’s House.
As a result, a continuous cycle of briefings and meetings is maintained to such an extent that officers hardly realize when 24 hours have passed. The outcome of this entire exercise is that while police stations, public hearings, and the offices of senior officers remain crowded with complainants, justice itself remains absent. Before appearing before a senior officer, citizens must pass through multiple stages of scrutiny, waiting, and often discourteous behavior from orderlies and support staff.
Eventually, this crowd disperses like dry leaves scattered by the autumn wind, and only about 10 out of every 100 complainants manage to reach the final door. In this way, the promise of justice promoted through advertisements, posters, and social media campaigns surrounding open public hearings six days a week is exposed for what it truly is.
The most interesting aspect is that even when a complainant, after great difficulty, succeeds in presenting their case before a senior officer, they are ultimately presented with the same report that had already been prepared by the relevant police station or officer. In other words, the first lollipop is simply handed back at the final stage in slightly better packaging.
The statistics themselves reveal the reality of this entire system. In 2025 alone, the IG Punjab Complaint Center 1787 received more than 185,000 complaints. These complaints included serious allegations such as refusal to register cases, delays in investigations, excessive use of force in arrests, abuse of authority, and poor performance.
During the first 100 days, more than 38,000 complaints were registered, while in the first six months of the year, the number exceeded 59,000. These figures contradict the claim that open public hearings and public complaint forums are making the justice system more effective.
The question now is: when will Chief Minister Maryam Nawaz, the new Inspector General of Punjab Police Rao Abdul Karim, and DIG Operations Faisal Kamran seriously examine this system?
Why is it that an issue which an officer can understand within minutes while sitting in an office cannot be resolved at the doorstep of a police station?
Why does the police station culture remain unchanged?
And when will the practice of requiring complainants to appear in these “public forums” before being heard finally come to an end?
These are questions that cannot be answered through advertisements; they can only be addressed through genuine and practical reforms.
