PCO0058

Written evidence submitted by Anonymous (PCO0058), supplementary to PCO0047

[Note: This evidence has been redacted by the Committee. *** represents redacted text.]

***

1. The IOPC Statutory Guidance on the Police Complaints System is very clear in respect of the Mandatory Referral Criteria (Chapter 9.4) which the appropriate authority must refer complains and recordable conduct matters that include allegations of conduct which constitutes:

‘any conduct matter relating to a chief officer (or the Deputy Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police Service) and any complaint relating to a chief officer (or the Deputy Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police Service) where the appropriate authority is unable to satisfy itself, from the complaint alone, that the conduct complained of, if it were proved, would not justify the bringing of criminal or disciplinary proceedings

2. Chapter 9.29 and 9.30 of the IOPC Statutory Guidance state:

9.29              An appropriate authority must refer to the IOPC any conduct matter relating to a chief officer (or Deputy Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police Service).

9.30              An appropriate authority must also refer to the IOPC any complaint relating to the conduct of a chief officer (or Deputy Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police Service) where the appropriate authority is unable to satisfy itself, from the complaint alone, that the conduct complained of, if it were proved, would not justify the bringing of criminal or disciplinary proceedings. This test should be based on the complaint alone.

3. Annex A of the IOPC Statutory Guidance further defines the statutory requirement / obligation placed on appropriate authorities in respect of complaints reported against chief officers:

A.9              The appropriate authority must refer to the IOPC any complaints relating to a chief officer (or Deputy Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police Service) where the appropriate authority is unable to satisfy itself that the conduct complained of, if it were proved, would not justify the bringing of criminal or disciplinary proceedings. This test should be based on the substance of the complaint alone, not on the apparent merit of the allegations and the appropriate authority should not carry out any preliminary investigative steps. The appropriate authority should have regard to the College of Policing guidance on outcomes when making this assessment.

4. What is becoming increasingly clear from the local policing bodies *** is that around 90% of the PCC’s have delegated ‘functions’ to their Chief Executives, or another member of the OPCC staff. Delegated functions that include making arrangements for dealing with complaints reported against the Chief Constable, arrangements that include re-contacting the complainant to obtain further information, collecting evidence and deciding with the appropriate authority (PCC) whether or not to refer a complaint to the IOPC, which is all clearly in contradiction to and in breach of the Mandatory Referral Criteria prescribed under the IOPC Statutory Guidance on the Police Complaints System.

5. It appears that a significant number of PCC’s as appropriate authorities have / are ‘manipulating’ the IOPC Statutory Guidance using their OPCC staff members under delegation to carry out preliminary investigative steps before deciding whether or not to refer a complaint reported against a chief officer in accordance with the Statutory Referral Criteria, in clear breach of their statutory obligations.

6. Many PCC’s as ‘appropriate authorities’ are ‘filtering’ complaints that must, under the Statutory Guidance, be referred to the IOPC. Appropriate authorities are failing to fulfil their statutory obligations to refer complaints reported against chief officers in accordance with the Mandatory Referral Criteria.

7. In short many complaints reported against chief officers are not being referred to the IOPC, the IOPC is not having to opportunity to investigate or review many of the reported complaints in the first place.

***

8. There has been a significant amount of window dressing to the police complaints system over the years, the IPCC being established to replace the Police Complaints Authority, the poor performance of the IPCC, the IOPC being introduced to replace the IPCC. Police Authorities being replaced by Offices of the locally elected Police and Crime Commissioners.

9. But the actual core of the police complaints system, the nuts and bolts of the legislation, regulation and statutory guidance has not changed in any way. On the surface it may appear to have changed and improved done but it has not. If anything the Statutory Guidance has become less clear and increasingly vague the IOPC Statutory Guidance on the Police Complaints System refers to ‘investigation’ and does not define whether the investigation is criminal or disciplinary in nature. The IOPC Statutory Guidance states that at the end of an investigation the file may be sent to the CPS for consideration of criminal charges.

10. Under previous iterations of the Statutory Guidance on the police complaints system, such as the Home Office’s Police Unsatisfactory Performance, Complaints and Misconduct Procedures it clearly defined between criminal and disciplinary investigations and made clear that criminal investigations should take precedence over any disciplinary investigation to avoid prejudice to any potential criminal proceedings that may follow.

11. The current IOPC Statutory Guidance on the police complaints system appears to almost invite the risk of prejudice to potential criminal proceedings following an investigation by being indistinct as to the type of investigation.

12. The IOPC, or any further evolution of the IOPC, must be a completely independent body to the police forces with their own authority to receive, review, consider and commence investigations into complaints and allegations of crime reported against any police officer including chief police officers.

13. The whole concept of using police Professional Standards Departments to investigate complaints and allegations of crime reported against fellow officers of the same force, immediately the risk of prejudice is introduced into any investigation. The investigation of complaints and allegations of crime reported against police officers, whatever rank, must be devolved from the police.

14. The IOPC, or whatever evolution thereof, must become in itself a wholly independent police force completely devolved from any other police force save the authority to investigate complaints and crimes reported against any police officer or member of staff.

March 2021