Seventeen personnel from the Police Department were dismissed during the last four months (October 2024-January 2025) over the charges of using narcotic drugs, the Police revealed yesterday (11). Police Media Spokesperson, SSP Buddhika Manathunga stated that a list of Police officers who were found to have used narcotic drugs has been identified through intelligence units and the Special Police Units.  The department had taken strict action against them. According to him, the suspects have been referred to a medical examination and if found to have been using narcotic drugs, action was taken to dismiss the relevant officers. “No apologies or a second chance will be given to any Police officers accused of drug use as a few individuals like that defame the whole Police service,” Manathunga stressed. Narcotics abuse by Police officers, and other public officials has been a long-standing problem, which made law enforcement and public services vulnerable to exploitation and inefficient. The move by the Police Department to address the matter is a welcomed change.

Yet, is the Police Department acting responsibly by simply discharging the offenders from their ranks? Are they not passing on their troubles to the community by not first directing those found guilty of breach of conduct, to seek rehabilitation? It is common knowledge that many Sri Lankans love it when authorities act though, but do such actions complicate the outcomes? Should not the Police Department act more responsibly? With a mandate for revolutionary change, the current Government which has promised a system change, is in a unique position to effect significant reforms that, if done right, can change the trajectory of Sri Lanka’s law enforcement and governance. It is high time for a national policy on how to address the social issue of narcotics abuse, and have a renewed focus on prevention, treatment, and corrections in the form of a national policy.

One of the key failures in the governance of the island over the last few decades is the lack of rule of law. Sri Lanka has systematically failed to enforce the laws which govern the land for decades. As such, lawlessness, crime, and corruption reign. One of the key issues which have been a part of the problem is the lack of integrity and professionalism in the law enforcement agencies. In many countries, governments perform integrity checks on key State officials, prime among them, law enforcement officials. Integrity tests are often simulated events that place a Police officer unwittingly in a monitored situation with an opportunity for unethical decision-making. Many countries such as the United Kingdom, the United States, New Zealand, Canada, and Australia use integrity tests, as they are useful means to prevent and detect police corruption. Integrity testing in policing can be traced back to the 1970-1972 Knapp Commission Inquiry (KPMG) in New York City, USA. With aims of reducing corruption within the New York Police Department (NYPD), the Commission suggested the use of “sting operations”, (the use of undercover officers), to simulate corruption opportunities for officers suspected of unethical behaviour. Since then, integrity testing for law enforcement has become a crucial internal control mechanism for police departments around the world. In 2011, the Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) in the UK, invited Transparency International UK (TI UK) to commission an external review of a report written by ACPO itself entitled “Managing Police Integrity: ACPO Approach 2011.” Such are the lengths, democratic countries go to ensure the integrity of their law enforcement apparatus. There are similar integrity testing mechanisms for the Judiciary, the State sector, and the military and national security apparatus, in many countries.

Given the past performance, it is clear that the current mandate, structure, and work of the National Police Commission is inadequate and slow. The Police need some independent oversight to ensure fair play and effectiveness in carrying out integrity checks. As such, the Government would be prudent to consider establishing an Ombudsman to monitor and address integrity-related issues of State officials and employees. Furthermore, perhaps it is time to establish a National Law Enforcement Conduct Commission, like that which is established in Australia. The problem needs more solutions than simply discharging a few officers from the Police Department. There needs to be reforms and the structure put in place to ensure the integrity and efficiency of the department.