Polygraph relies on trickery, not science: Law Commission



J. Venkatesan
Truth-detecting tools violate human rights, so ban them



http://www.hindu.com/2009/05/07/stories/2009050760871800.htm


New Delhi: Observing that narco-analysis (NA), polygraph and brain
fingerprinting (BFP) as tools of police investigation violated basic
human rights, the Law Commission of India has recommended that these
truth-detecting techniques be banned immediately.

The Commission, headed by Justice A.R. Lakshmanan, in its report to be
submitted to the government next week, said: “The police are a
disciplined force trained to uphold the law and to enable democratic
institutions to function lawfully. Police powers are confined by the
provisions of the Constitution, the Police Act, the Criminal Procedure
Act, the Evidence Act and many other local and special laws which
impose restrictions on the scope and method of exercise of that
power.”

Police accountable


The report said: “Forensic scientists should inspire the police with
their scientific methods not to violate the norms. They will be
accused of conspiring with them if they are a party to using these
psychological coercive methods. Courts have powers to extract
accountability from the police in case of violations of human rights
in exercising their functions.”

Narco test “dubious”


The Commission pointed out that NA was borrowed from psychiatric
practice and used by the police, seeking the help of psychiatrists
during yesteryear, and discontinued subsequently all over the world
for two reasons: one, the police themselves found the technique
dubious, and two, the psychiatrists were bound by ethical
considerations and were not forthcoming to perform the technique when
the examination was requested as an aid to criminal investigation.

It said NA was rarely used even for therapeutic purposes today.

“The revelations made under the influence of the drugs cannot be
considered a reliable recollection of past events. Not only may the
inveterate criminal psychopath lie under the influence of drugs which
have been tested but the relatively normal and well-adjusted
individual may also successfully disguise factual data.”

The Commission took up the issue following a memorandum received from
the Forensic Science Society of India expressing serious concern at
the widespread use of NA and BFP in police investigation during the
past few years with the tacit approval of a few courts.

With supporting documents, the society pointed out that this practice
was discontinued in all “civilised” countries almost five decades ago.

The Commission sought the opinion of various experts, police, doctors
and psychologists in arriving at its findings.

The Commission said it came to know that in a laboratory in Bangalore,
NA was being conducted several times for the same subject until a
preferred result was obtained. This was ample proof to show that the
technique was not based on any scientific principle.

On the polygraph test or lie-detector, the report said: “The results
obtained from a polygraph test are much less credible, since the
device measures the body’s reaction to two different types of
questions. The dirty little secret behind the test is it depends on
trickery, not science. Perversely, the test is inherently biased
against the truthful.”

Similarly, according to reports, the Commission said BFP was proved
only at the experimental stage and not effective, and it violated the
sanctity of the mind.