HE case of an upright police officer refusing to be intimidated by political authorities keeping him from doing his job is the usual tale of modernity and progress versus stubbornness and exploitation. DPO Shariq Kamal found himself up against a local influential in the southern Punjab district of Bahawalnagar. According to reports bolstered by media images of Mr Kamal being honoured by local traders the outgoing district police officer won the respect of the people of the area after he refused to be cowed by the local MNA who had been angered by the drif t of an investigation. Senior members of the police department have confirmed that DPO Kamal rejected a compromise with the MNA; for this show of integrity, he was relieved of his duties by the provincial authorities and sent to the federal pool in Islamabad. Such a principled stand is quite rare and must be appreciated. In a country where the clamour for transparency and autonomous, unaffected and politically free law enforcement has been increasing with time it is bound to be viewed as a sign of reform in the near future. But yet again, the incident brings out the need for allowing the police a free hand without any political interference whatsoever in the performance of their functions, after putting in place a system that can hold the law enforcers accountable for any misdeeds.

There may, of course, be other versions that might want to present the MNA in a better light, and, instead, question whether the police officer might have overreacted or acted out of reasons other than commitment to his job. But such is the extent of our disillusionment with the whole system that we simply want to stand by those who want to establish the writ of law without considering both sides of the picture. The right example is important, and DPO Kamal`s case must be upheld as one. However, a balanced perspective is necessary to detect the failings of each side.