Have the police bungled once again in the handling of notorious criminal and alleged land grabber Suleman Siddique? Barely two months after the gaffe that saw Suleman escape from the Ribandar lockup with a constable in tow, he now gets the freedom to make phone calls to journalists from the Colvale jail, a prison equally notorious for smuggling narcotics, phones, etc inside. In the recent case, Suleman dials from the prison and narrates that the second video he released earlier was fake.
He speaks about torture and an attempt to eliminate him.
One of the most disturbing aspects of this case is the amount of liberty that Suleman enjoys while in custody, even after his re-arrest following the great escape that left the police humiliated. Despite being a suspect in several serious crimes, including land grabbing and escape from prison, Suleman was allowed to speak to journalists from within the jail.
Now here is the tricky part. Suleman claims that he did not use a cellphone, but used a phone inside the prison. The police claim that they recovered Suleman’s mobile phone after one of his calls. And voila -- the phone number Suleman used to call journalists, is still actively ringing. This is mind-boggling.
We understand that Suleman cannot be trusted, but can the police’s claim be relied upon? The facts don’t add up. Suleman claims that his second video was recorded at gunpoint and that the police had orchestrated his escape to divert attention from a job scam, both of which have been widely disputed by the police. Against this background, how does one swallow the fact that Suleman gets liberties to speak his mind while in custody and police fail to take adequate measures to prevent him from making contact with the outside world?
The fact that Suleman was able to speak to journalists and make calls to the media while in custody raises questions about the police’s protocols for dealing with criminals. This is particularly disturbing given the nature of Suleman’s crimes, which include land grabbing, murder and the recent escape from prison. One expected police to tighten vigil around him, especially after the escape.
Furthermore, the response to the developments has been inadequate. The police, including the jail superintendent, have not convincingly explained how Suleman had access to a phone, or how he was allowed a conversation while at court. Dismissing allegations made by Suleman because he is a criminal is fine, but that should not stop the police from at least covertly looking at some of the serious allegations involving politicians. This attitude is unbecoming of a law enforcement agency and could damage public trust.
This Suleman Siddique episode is a stark reminder of the need for effective policing and the importance of accountability in law enforcement. The police must not only protect the public and prevent crimes, they must also set high standards of professionalism and integrity. The developments in this case demonstrate that the Goa police still have much to learn when it comes to handling high-profile cases and dealing with suspects like Suleman.
