Mahir Haneef
Kochi: Hundreds of people would have saved their necks and many thousands could have saved many years of imprisonment had our identification parades been updated using modern technologies. The present system of identification parade is archaic and needs to be updated urgently, say experts.
James Vadackumchery, noted criminologist, said “The present system of identification was instituted in 1861 by the British according to the CrPc (Criminal procedure Code). Identification parades conducted today are done according to the law written by Macaulay more than a century ago.”
Law says that an identification parade has to be conducted ‘blind’, but how safe are the parades conducted by the police today? The existing system of identification is such that a group of men are lined up and the witness is asked to identify from that group. The policeman who accompanies the victim will know beforehand who the suspect is. Mr Vadackumchery says “There were instances when the policeman who accompanies the witness gave away the whole procedure by giving signs to the witness by coughing and other visual signs.” A system of making the police escort “blind” hasn’t been developed even after a century of practising the identification parade.
Dr B Umadathan, former head of forensic science department of Kerala, points out another irony of the identification process. “The suspect is produced before a court well before the identification parade. Therefore, the photograph of the suspect will already be published in newspapers and the media and therefore the whole process is a waste. Therefore, what is termed as a scientific process in our country is really unscientific and needs to be updated.”
Not only the process but the existing law has to be changed with regards to identification parades, says Mr Umadathan. “The existing system of identification results in the witness comparing the mental picture he formed from the crime scene to the most resembling individual in the group. This is ineffective in crimes happening within a few minutes, the witness mostly won’t get a chance to see the perpetrator clearly. The only case where the witness or victim can undoubtedly point out the criminal would be a rape case, due to the prolonged nature of contact.”
Many nations have switched to more scientific methods of identification due to the problems of the system that we still continue to use, says Mr Umadathan. “When the witness or victim compares the mental image of the culprit to those present in the group, he will point out the most similar person as the mind doesn’t block him from doing so even if the real person is not in the group. Innocent person may get chosen because of this.
There was a case in Changanassery where a person was rendered unconscious and then robbed. When we took him for identification, he identified many persons as the perpetrator under several circumstances.”
Foreign countries have done research in this regard and are now using a technique called double-blind lineup, said Mr Umadattan. Explaining the concept, he said “In this system, the witness or the victim is shown only one person at a time by pointing a light at him and thereby casting a silhouette. Each person of the group is shown in this manner and the result is that the witness compares the mental image to each person and decides whether it is the culprit or not. This method makes the witness bank more on his memory of the scene and come up with a conclusion.”
In the double-blind lineup, the official who conducts the parade doesn’t know who the suspect is and therefore cannot suggest it to the witness, says Mr Umadathan.
