NEWS
CHIEFS MUST NOT BE ALLOWED TO BECOME AUTHORITARIAN
Home Office announces changes to the police officer dismissal process. PFEW warns the changes are a ‘huge retrograde step’ and the system shakeup will see a return to the dark days when officers were dismissed by an individual and a tribunal later found they had acted unlawfully
On 31 August, the Home Office announced a slew of changes aimed at ‘reforming’ the police officer dismissal process and affording sweeping powers to chief officers. The Home Office declared this is being done after an extensive review, conducted over more than four months, to examine various aspects of the decision- making process of police dismissals. At the same time, the Home Office did not immediately release the findings of the review or announce when it will be doing so. In February, the Police Federation of England and Wales (PFEW) submitted detailed evidence to the review to ensure it reflects the correct state of affairs and made robust suggestions to strengthen the existing independent and transparent mechanism of the Legally Qualified Chair (LQC)-led process. The PFEW submitted its stand that
LQCs, introduced on 1 January 2016 as a result of the Police (Conduct) (Amendment) Regulations 2015, have brought much needed objectivity, fairness and proportionality to decision making within misconduct hearings, and therefore, repose great trust in the LQCs to reach fair and proportionate decisions. The PFEW had cautioned that any changes to the police regulations based on an “extremely quick review of police officer dismissals by the
Home Office would be very unhelpful at this stage as there are good reasons underpinning the introduction of LQCs and for holding misconduct hearings in public. The PFEW would not wish to see any changes made at this time that could result in intended consequences including a reduction in transparency, objectivity,
04 | POLICE | OCTOBER | 2023
fairness and proportionality in decision making. Any changes to the police disciplinary system should be properly considered as part of policing’s response to recommendations arising out of the Casey review and the Angiolini Inquiry.” However, under the new system proposed by the Home Office, LQCs have been removed from their position
transparency. The outcome will be determined by a majority panel decision. Chief constables will also be given the right to challenge decisions made by the panels. According to the proposed changes, a finding of gross misconduct will automatically result in a police officer’s dismissal, unless exceptional circumstances apply.
“Let’s not forget that the current state of policing is down to chief constables for failing to implement stringent vetting practices, maintain high standards and provide training to those who investigate corrupt officers.”
as chairs of the misconduct panels and will be replaced with Legally Qualified Persons providing independent advice. The panels will be presided over by chief constables allowing them much greater powers to decide whether officers should be dismissed though the hearings will continue to be held in public to maintain
Responding to the announcement, PFEW National Chair Steve Hartshorn said: “Corrupt officers have no place in the police service. We agree the police dismissals process must be robust to
remove officers who do not belong in the service as swiftly as possible and can be strengthened, however, that does not mean we throw the rulebook of police regulations out of the window. The democratic and transparent mechanism of LQCs has been found fit for purpose. Now, many of the regulation changes
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52
