Morris Inquiry – Recommendation 34 – Operation Helios Review

Report: 11
Date: 26 April 2007
By: Chief Executive

Summary

The report of the Morris Inquiry included a recommendation that there should be “a full case review of Operation Helios which is independent of the MPS. The review should include examining the issue of race discrimination”. This report enables the Committee and Authority to decide whether to take any further action on that recommendation, having regard to the outcome of the Essex Police Investigation into complaints about Operation Helios, and to the costs (financial and otherwise) of a further review.

A. Recommendations

That the Committee and Authority determine if any further action should be taken on Morris recommendation 34, or if the investigation of complaints carried out by Essex Police under the oversight of IPCC should be treated as fulfilling recommendation 34.

B. Supporting information

1. The Report of the Morris Inquiry included a recommendation (number 34) that there should be “a full case review of Operation Helios which is independent of the MPS. The review should include examining the issue of race discrimination”.

2. The Inquiry’s own review of Operation Helios and its reasons for that recommendation can be found in the Morris Report at Chapter 10, paras. 10.14 to 10.76. Members have a copy of the Report, and it is available on the MPA Web site (see link at the end of this report).

3. When the Morris Report was received by the Authority in February 2005, there was an ongoing investigation being carried out by Essex Police into complaints made by persons affected by Operation Helios, under the oversight of the IPCC. That investigation had only started in September 2004, after the Inquiry Panel had completed their work. The Authority could not properly consider Morris recommendation 34 until the closure of the Essex Police investigation. Closure was not achieved until 19 February 2007, which was the last date for any complainant to appeal to the IPCC against the outcome. This opens the way for the Authority to make a decision on recommendation 34.

4. The investigation conducted by Essex Police concerned complaints made by 17 individuals directed against 22 officers. There were, in total, 122 allegations. The majority of the complaints and allegations related to the conduct of Operation Helios itself, but some concerned the way that the MPS initially managed those complaints. The complaints regarding Operation Helios were dealt with under the Police Act 1996 and the others were dealt with under the Police Reform Act 2002. The IPCC took over the role of the PCA in relation to the 1996 Act matters - to satisfy itself that the complaints had been properly and thoroughly investigated and to decide if there was sufficient evidence to justify misconduct proceedings against any officer. The IPCC also supervised the investigation of the 2002 Act matters.

5. The Essex Police investigation was led by the Deputy Chief Constable of Essex Police. The final report comprised 22 binders and supporting documentation. The complaints covered Rudeness/disrespect; Intimidation and harassment; Dishonesty; Racism; Breach of privacy; Unlawful acts; and Inappropriate disclosure.

6. The investigation started in September 2004 and the Report was sent to the IPCC in January 2006. The total cost of the sixteen months long investigation was in excess of £1m.

7. None of the allegations was found to be substantiated against any officer.

8. One officer on Operation Helios received advice, following the completion of the investigation, on a peripheral matter relating to record keeping. A former senior officer received advice about the timely service of Regulation 9 notices to officers who were the subject of complaints. No other steps were taken in relation to any other officers.

9. The Essex Investigation recommended that a number of issues should be dealt with by way of individual learning, organisational learning and a review of working practices. The Investigation highlighted deficiencies in the way that policy and other decisions were recorded, including inadequacy of reasons for some decisions; it drew attention to the need for an effective audit trail of authorisations; and it highlighted the need for action to address weaknesses in certain MPS procedures for surveillance, including the attribution of code words to nominals. None of these observations appear inconsistent with the type of criticisms that could be expected when such a complex and long-running enquiry is subjected to this level of scrutiny.

10. The Morris Report commented on allegations of racism made by Supt Dizaei and the NBPA. The Inquiry members commented that “in the absence of a full case review, we are not satisfied, on the evidence we have received, that race discrimination occurred”. The Report recommended specifically that the independent review should “examine the issue of race discrimination”.

11. In that connection, it should be noted that it was explicit in the terms of reference for the Essex Investigation that “allegations of racism made by the complainants will be fully addressed”.

12. The various allegations of racism and discriminatory behaviour in the course of the investigation were not directed at individual officers and so were not dealt with as formal complaints under the Police Act. However, one complainant specifically alleged that officers carried out a racially motivated enquiry. The IPCC informed that complainant that in the course of the Essex investigation, no evidence had been revealed that indicates misconduct by any officer or that demonstrates racist behaviour on the part of any individual.

13. The Authority may reasonably consider that the Essex Police Investigation has fulfilled the recommendation made by the Morris Inquiry. While the Investigation may not have been exactly what was envisaged by Morris as a “full case review”, it was an extensive investigation into the conduct of Operation Helios across a wide range of issues raised by complainants, and it was carried out independently of the MPS under the oversight of the IPCC. Most of the concerns pondered by Morris were examined by the Essex investigation on the basis of the complaints received.

14. It is difficult to see what, if any, further benefit could be derived from more scrutiny of Operation Helios at this stage. Given the extensive scope of the Essex Police Investigation, and the outcome, it seems most unlikely that any material new matters would arise, or that any significant new illumination would be shed on Operation Helios as a basis for learning. On the disbenefit side, however, launching another investigation several years after the events in question would prolong the stress on all the serving and former officers involved, as well as on other parties such as the complainants. It will be a distraction for MPS management, away from other pressing priorities, including the action to move forward with process and organisational changes made as a result of Morris.

15. Also, a further review would incur additional substantial costs for which no budget provision has been made. Even if the scope of a further review was limited, say, to a critical appraisal of all extant materials – from Morris and the Essex investigation – it would still be likely to cost in excess of £50,000. Already, so much has been said and written and published by official judgements and investigations, and individuals, that it would perhaps be fanciful to think that any one account would be accepted as in any sense a definitive review so as to justify extra cost.

16. As previously reported to this Committee and Full Authority, substantial progress has been made by the MPS by way of implementation of the recommendations of the Morris Inquiry in general. A key element of that work, and the one most directly pertinent to the learning from Operation Helios, was the fundamental review of the Directorate of Professional Standards: that will be the vehicle for institutionalising the learning from Morris and Essex in relation to investigations of officers in future in the MPS. As Members are aware, the “Together” Programme and the MPS Leadership Academy are also vital elements in the changes within the MPS addressing issues for leadership and management identified by Morris.

C. Race and equality impact

1. As earlier stated, the Morris Inquiry recommended that ‘there should be a full case review of Operation Helios which is independent of the MPS.’ The Authority set a programme of work, in conjunction with the Commissioner, to ensure that lessons learned from this and other high profile cases in relation to case management, the way officers are notified of investigations, the use of policy files, the use of lay advisors, early informal resolution and the issuing of press statements were to be incorporated as part of DPS’ Fundamental Review.

2. Two years on and the Fundamental Review has led to some improvements in the investigation of police officers in relation to evidence-gathering and timeliness. That said, there maintains a role for DPS and the MPS to build on the improvements it has made and to continue to communicate and demonstrate the impact of these changes with its key stakeholders both internally and externally.

3. In maintaining its strategic oversight and scrutiny functions, the MPA will continue to press and monitor both DPS and the MPS to ensure that its action in relation to investigating police officers, particularly those from BME communities is fair, relevant, evidence-led and proportionate. By doing so, both the MPS and the MPA will be striving to meet the objectives of its respective Equalities Schemes by eliminating unlawful discrimination and promoting good relations between people of different groups.

D. Financial implications

There is no budget provision for an independent case review. At this stage, any estimate of costs must be provisional. Nevertheless, a range of cost between £50,000 and £200,000 seems possible.

E. Background papers

• Morris Inquiry Report

F. Contact details

Report author(s): David Riddle, MPA

For more information contact:

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

Send an e-mail linking to this page

Feedback