LETTERS: Let’s shun eyewitness culture in emergencies

Let’s shun the "eyewitness" culture to emergencies before it plunges the country into a deeper tragedy.

Public conduct during disasters is one of a peculiar nature that exposes the majority of them to harm. Disaster management systems put more emphasis on software response and public relations than hardware and participatory approach that encompasses more of preparedness, relief, rehabilitation, mitigation, and prevention.

Globally, disaster management seeks to support affected persons to a swift return to normalcy. In spite of enhanced coordination of disaster incidents lately, crowd management at disaster scenes remains a serious challenge, especially with disasters whose risk exposure is high.

Entrance to a disaster situation should follow a comprehensive risk exposure assessment by a competent authority. Even for the fourth estate, the political class and or rescue teams should at all times abide by that and always take due diligence before jumping into a disaster scene.

For instance, some reporters escaped by a whisker during the Dusit attack after a vehicle they were taking cover besides exploded, not to mention the risk of stumbling on hazardous objects that were littered all over the compound.

Again, at Mulik heights towers, reporters and civilians jumped into the disaster scene in total disregard to risk exposure they were getting themselves into supposedly for news gathering and or on a salvage mission.

The absence of disaster management framework is the weakest link as a tool for disaster risk reduction plus response and awareness creation at the community level. Such was the case during the Sachangwan fire disaster in 2009 where more than 100 people died. Low community vigilance and proactiveness then, ended in a high number of avoidable fatalities.

Inordinately, the political class has perfected the art of seeking political capital from disaster occurrences. However, by storming into disaster scenes, they cause a stampede, create disorderliness, hamper professionalism while endangering their lives, that of their followers, victims, and volunteers.

Notably, in advanced civilisations, their disaster policies promote swift evacuation of the vulnerable members of the society as far away as practically possible from harm.

To the contrary, in third world jurisdictions, curious onlookers, uninvited political sympathisers, and looters patronise disaster scenes uninvitedly only to grow into a threat to public order.

Police presence to a disaster location is critical in enforcing law and order, thus help ease fears, keep away looters, do crowd control, ensure public safety, direct traffic and organize rescue and search teams.

Let us shun the eye witness culture before it plunges the country into a deeper tragedy. Indeed, in a scenario like one of Dusit attack, the aggressors' maneuvers or intentions are unknown.

A good reason why the public should always keep off disaster situations and especially where they have no role to play.

In the meantime, authorities should put in place seamless structures that entrench disaster management practices to the structural and architectural designs, infrastructure designs, risk co-ordination strategies and to disaster framework activations for consistency, uniformity, and effectiveness in policy applications.

Awareness creation and sharing of applicable frameworks will ensure a co-ordinated and focused approach to risk management and fosters a participatory partnership between actors for a safe, resilient and sustainable society.