Police Complaints System

Special Meeting: Deaths in Custody
Report: 3
Date: 18 January 2002
By: Clerk

Summary

This paper sets out the changes to the police complaints system that are likely to be brought about by the Police Reform Act 2002 and the introduction of the Independent Police Complaints Commission in April 2003.

A. Recommendations

Members are invited

1. to note the implications and opportunities for the Metropolitan Police Authority.
2. to agree that the Professional Standards and performance Monitoring Committee should monitor the progress of the legislation and preparation of guidelines

B. Supporting information

Background

1. The need for a system for the investigation of complaints against the police that is fair, effective and commands the confidence of the public has been evident for a number of years. Calls for a move towards the independent investigation of complaints were made by Lord Scarman in the 1981 Report on the Brixton Disorders and more recently by the Home Affairs Select Committee in its 1997 Report into Police Complaints. When responding to the Stephen Lawrence Report suggestion of greater independence in the investigation of police complaints the Home Secretary indicated support for the proposal.

2. In December 2000 the Home Office published the white paper 'Complaints Against the Police: a Framework for a New System.' This set out the emerging plans for a new complaints procedure which will come to fruition through enabling regulations in the forthcoming Police Reform Bill. The following changes are likely.

New framework

3. There will be a new independent body which will replace the Police Complaints Authority. It will be known as the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC). It is intended that the new body will have a more proactive role in building a system in which all stakeholders can have confidence.

4. The proposed framework is intended to lead to:

• increase public confidence and trust in the police and in the complaints system;
• increase accessibility, openness and independence;
• speed the resolution of complaints;
• improve communications with complainants; and
• improve collection, collation and reporting of data.

Definition of a complaint

5. The present definition of a complaint is quite limited. A complaint can be made by the 'victim' or their legal representative but not by third parties. Only constables to chief superintendents are subject to the complaints procedure. However the scope will be broadened as follows:

• a bystander who witnessed police misconduct will be allowed to make a complaint
• the new system will cover in all respects: regular police officers (irrespective of rank), special constables and civilian employees
• the IPCC will be expected to widen access to the complaints system by creating other gateways into it (eg Citizens Advice Bureau) and will provide guidelines on how complaints can be made
• complainants will have a right to appeal to the IPCC against the refusal by a Chief Officer to record a complaint. In the case of ACPO ranks, this will be against the police authority.

6. Where police conduct arising from the direction and control of a force leads to public concern and complaint, the Home Office consider the chief officer and police authority should have a duty to the community they serve to deal with the complaint in a constructive way. Consequently, a mechanism involving the police authority to deal with complaints against the direction and control of a police force (either as part of, or separate from the procedure for handling complaints against police misconduct) will be introduced.

Informal resolution as an alternative to full investigation

7. In order to have a speedy and understandable process as an alternative to formal investigations for resolving complaints, the informal resolution process will:

• be retained and renamed 'local resolution'
• continue to be used for allegations, which, if proved, would not lead to criminal or disciplinary proceedings. However, where there are no prospects of obtaining the necessary evidence to substantiate complaints, the chief officer, or police authority for ACPO ranks, will be able to apply to the IPCC for authority to use local resolution instead of formal investigation
• be strengthened to provide a range of different approaches: management resolution, restorative conference and mediation.

Investigations by the IPCC

8. The IPCC will:

• have referred to it any case falling into specified categories, whether or not a complaint has been made, and will have the discretion to investigate or supervise
• have the call in power to investigate or supervise other complaints at its discretion
• have its own investigating teams, independent from the police, made up of independent civilian investigation managers who will manage the teams on a day-to-day basis and have seconded senior police investigators. The remainder of the teams with suitable mixes of police and non-police members to achieve the optimum in both performance and public confidence
• initially, not have the powers of a police constable for the non-police personnel in its investigating teams since the seconded police officers can provide the necessary powers.

9. Additionally, the Secretary of State will have an enabling power to bestow upon non-police personnel in independent investigating teams all or part of the powers of a police constable and other powers as appropriate, after consulting police organisations and the IPCC. Chief Officers will have a legal obligation to:

• produce and/or give access to the IPCC documents or other material as called for
• allow members of the IPCC to take away documents or other material, or take copies
• allow entry to police premises.

10. The proposed categories in which complaint and non-complaint cases will have to be referred to the IPCC are:

• deaths in police care or custody
• fatal road traffic incidents in which a police vehicle is involved
• shooting incidents in which a police officer discharges a firearm in the course of a police operation
• allegations of serious corruption involving police officers;
• miscarriages of justice resulting allegedly from misconduct by a police officer
• allegations of racist conduct
• serious arrestable offences allegedly committed by a police officer
• allegations that serious injury to a member of the public has been caused by a police officer.

11. The IPCC will also have powers at its discretion to call in for independent investigation or supervision other complaints not falling within those specified categories.

IPCC powers in relation to complaints investigated by police

12. In order for the IPCC to operate effectively and for it to be seen to be independent from the police, there will need to be a clear separation of powers and responsibilities.

• The chief officer or police authority in the case of ACPO ranks will be responsible for providing the complainant with a full written account of the outcome of a formal investigation into a complaint against a police officer;
• complainant to have a right of appeal to the IPCC against the decision by the chief officer or police authority; and
• in dealing with an appeal from a complainant, the IPCC will undertake a comprehensive review of the case and should have the power to uphold the decision, advise or direct the chief officer or police authority to review the decision, call for a re-investigation, either supervised or not, or re-investigate the case itself.

13. An important aspect of this process will be the willingness, when appropriate, to acknowledge when errors have been made and/or when officers have acted improperly. This may raise issues of legal liability, which can inhibit open admission of fault.

Discipline

14. In order to build public confidence in the new complaints system, additional powers will be given to the IPCC and the presiding officer of a disciplinary panel in regards to complaints cases:

• the IPCC will have discretionary powers to present or observe cases it investigated, and cases investigated by others, whether or not those cases were supervised
• in disciplinary cases arising from a complaint, one of the three members of the panel is to be independent of the police
• as a consequence, police authorities will be obliged to compile and maintain lists of independent people, excluding members of the police authority itself, eligible to sit on discipline panels.
• in attending a disciplinary hearing up to the point that a finding is reached, a complainant can be accompanied by up to three people of their choice;
• the presiding officer will have the discretion to allow the complainant to be accompanied by more than three people if, in their opinion, the circumstances of the case justify it and there are no reasonable objections from the accused officer; and
• the presiding officer to have the discretion to exclude any persons.

15. Over and above the provisions set out above, there is a view that disciplinary hearings should be open to the public at large. In general, the police service is opposed to making disciplinary hearings open to the public but it is not opposed to exploring whether cases at the serious end of the scale should be open to the public. The issue is still under consideration.

Openness

16. Also under active consideration is the suggestion that openness can be increased by changing how the outcome of investigations are dealt with and by enabling all concerned to make greater use of the information gathered during an investigation.

• the IPCC, chief officers and police authorities, in their dealings with the complainant, should have the discretion to disclose information from the investigation of complaints subject only to a harm test
• the IPCC should have the freedom to use information received from reports and other documents from police forces, after excluding sensitive or demonstrably confidential material, to compile guidance, promotional and other material for the purpose of continuous improvement in the complaints procedure and in raising the public's awareness and understanding of the complaints procedure.

17. The dilemma remains how to achieve openness while maintaining the integrity, candour and quality of the investigation report. To enable the IPCC, chief officer or police authority to provide a complainant with a full written account of the outcome of a formal investigation into a complaint, they will need discretionary powers to disclose information from the investigation of complaints subject only to a harm test. The new procedures will mean that the body investigating the complaint will have a responsibility for giving the complainant a full and frank explanation of how and why the conclusions to an investigation were reached. In many cases, it will be possible for this report to incorporate all the relevant evidence considered during the course of the investigation.

18. Clearly there will be some material or information which should not be disclosed; for example, details which might identify a potentially vulnerable witness or reveal the identity of a confidential police informant. The body that has investigated the complaint, whether it is the IPCC, a police force or police authority, should be entitled to keep such information confidential where necessary. There may also be internal personnel management matters which will not be of direct interest to the complainant. For these reasons, compulsory disclosure of all relevant evidence in every case is unlikely.

Civil cases against the police

19. When civil cases against the police are lost or settled, the criminal and disciplinary issues need to be reviewed:

• on receipt of a notification of civil action, immediate consideration should be given to the disciplinary and criminal issues and, if appropriate, an investigation commenced
• the police force or police authority will notify the IPCC of all civil cases at the outset and of the proposed action
• the IPCC will have the power to call in the case for supervision or independent investigation, according to the criteria used in complaints cases
• the IPCC will need notification of all civil cases at the outset and it will have the power to call in the case for supervision or independent investigation, according to the criteria used in normal complaints cases.

Role of the IPCC in criminal proceedings

20. In cases investigated by the IPCC, the IPCC will be responsible for determining whether a case is submitted to the CPS for consideration and will have the power to submit it direct to the CPS. It will remain a CPS responsibility to provide the proper scrutiny and challenge and to decide if criminal proceedings are brought in complaints cases investigated by either the IPCC or police forces.

Further legislation

21. The Bill to implement these proposals has not yet been published. We understand, however, that there is unlikely to be any provisions affecting the current responsibilities of police authorities in respect of discipline action against officers of ACPO rank.

22. Other aspects of the police authority role under the new arrangements remain unclear. The Association of Police Authorities is represented on the Home Office led Programme Board which will draw up guidelines for the operation of the new scheme and the MPA's legal adviser, Graham Gordon, is also a member. The Professional Standards and Performance Monitoring Committee may want to feed into this exercise through reports from the APA and Graham Gordon.

C. Financial implications

Not readily definable at this stage.

D. Background papers

Complaints against the police: a consultation paper (May 2000)
APA response to the Home Office – complaints against police (APA circular 37/2000)
Complaints against police – framework for a new system (December 2000)

E. Contact details

Report author: Keith Dickinson, MPA.

For information contact:

MPA general: 020 7202 0202
Media enquiries: 020 7202 0217/18

Send an e-mail linking to this page

Feedback