Role of members in reviewing and responding to high profile complaints and discipline cases

Report: 6
Date: 13 February 2001
By: Clerk

Summary

The MPA has been actively involved in a number of high profile complaints and discipline issues. There have been no formal agreements with the MPS on the nature of this involvement.

This paper recommends guidelines that can inform the nature and level of involvement that the Committee's Members and other Members of the Authority should have in reviewing and responding to high profile complaints and discipline cases.

A. Recommendations

1. That the protocol relating to Members' involvement with individual complaints, set out in Appendix 2, be approved.
2. That a protocol be developed relating to the MPA's involvement in high profile and sensitive complaints or discipline processes, using the definition set out in Appendix 3.
3. That the Committee agrees the principles which will inform this protocol, as set out in paragraph 3 of this report.
4. That a draft protocol be presented to the next meeting of the Committee for approval, taking account of Members' views at the present meeting.

B. Supporting information

The Committee's terms of reference are attached as Appendix 1. They include the responsibility:

• to satisfy the Authority's statutory duty to monitor complaints procedures and matters, with particular reference to issues of equal opportunities;
• to examine all other issues of internal complaint investigations including internal discipline matters, complaints against civil staff, quality of service complaints and civil claims.

A draft protocol relating to Members' involvement in individual complaints was prepared some time ago. This is attached as Appendix 2 and the Committee is invited to formally approve it.

However, the Committee may consider that there is a need for a protocol that deals specifically with high profile complaints and discipline cases, given the sensitivity of these for the MPA, the MPS and the public. The Co-ordination & Urgency Committee recently approved a definition of high profile and/or sensitive cases for dealing with notification and settlement arrangements for all compensation cases, eg: civil actions (Appendix 3). The Committee may wish to base a protocol on this definition

Clearly, a protocol will need the support of the MPS if it is to be effective. It is suggested that it should take account of the following principles:

• clear criteria on which kinds of cases the Authority will have a role in reviewing and responding to;
• a process for keeping the full Authority informed of decisions and progress on such cases;
• a process for working with the MPS in such cases, including full access to briefings and reports, without compromising the investigation;
• a process for the agreed publication and release of reports arising from any review where MPA members have been involved. The full Authority on 8 February will be considering a report on this issue and its decisions will be take account of in producing a draft protocol;
• a clear and agreed process by which the Committee will monitor and review the MPS' implementation of recommendations arising from any such review.

The development of a protocol will give a clear signal that the MPA is taking its responsibilities seriously and with a high degree of objectivity.

C. Financial implications

There are no financial implications to this report

D. Background papers

• MPA Standing Orders, Professional Standards and Performance Standards (PSPM) Committee responsibilities
• Chairs Co-ordination and Urgency Committee report – MPA/MPA Protocol on Compensation Cases
• MPA Draft Protocol on Members' involvement with Individual Complaint protocol
  Authority report – Handling of Major or Sensitive Issues
• The Virdi Inquiry Terms of Reference

F. Contact details

The author of this report is Julia Smith, MPA.

For information contact:

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

Appendix 1

A Committee of seven Members that meets monthly, both to monitor performance and fulfil the Authority's statutory role in monitoring complaints matters. The Committee will consider complaints statistics and satisfy itself as to the efficacy of procedures. Terms of reference are:

• to satisfy the Authority's statutory duty to monitor complaints procedures and matters, with particular reference to issues of equal opportunities;
• to examine all other issues of internal complaint investigation including internal discipline matters, complaints against civil staff, quality of service complaints and civil claims;
• to keep the MPS anti-corruption activities under review;
• to investigate and deal with any complaints about the conduct of officers of ACPO rank in accordance with appropriate regulations;
• to consider all matters relating to discipline and complaints against ACPO rank officers, within regulations;
• to consider any matters relating to Police Appeal Tribunals and to arrange a rota for the appointment of Members to serve on Tribunals as and when required. NB Members to be appointed from Authority as a whole.

Performance monitoring matters

(NB: Other committees also undertake monitoring roles)

• to give detailed consideration to, and monitor, the effects of, policing policies and practices on equal opportunities with particular emphasis on issues of diversity;
• to give detailed consideration to, and monitor, performance against the Policing Plan Targets and performance indicators. This to include all Best Value Performance Indicators;
• to give detailed consideration to, and monitor performance by examining HMIC and Audit Commission performance indicators;
• to consider any other performance monitoring information;
• to report to the Authority on any issues as appropriate.

NB: Police Appeals Tribunals

Police Appeal Tribunals are not part of the Authority's formal structure and will be independent bodies set up by the Authority under detailed regulations to hear appeals from police officers who have been dismissed or reduced in rank. It should consider any matters of policy.

Appendix 2: Members' involvement with complaints against the Metropolitan Police Service

Protocol

This protocol sets out the process for members' involvement in:

• complaints against individual officers as defined by Section 65 of the 1996* Police Act**.
• complaints involving the direction and control of the service which does not fall within the provisions of Section 65 of the Act;
• advice on situations where members might wish, or be asked, to act in a capacity other than that of an MPA member.

*"Complaint" means a complaint about the conduct of a member of a police force which is submitted (a) by a member of the public, or (b) on behalf of a member of the public with his/her written consent.
**Therefore referred to as the Act.

1. Context

1. MPA members are likely to be faced with a range of situations and opportunities where they may receive general complaints against the MPS as well as specific complaints against a named police officer. In all such instances, it is important that members first establish the nature of the complaint, and that individuals are encouraged to write formally to the MPA.
2. Where individuals are unable to write a formal letter of complaint or make a statement by themselves (e.g. due to mental health, learning difficulty, illiteracy, English as a second language etc.), MPA members could record the details of the conversation, and with the oral consent of the individual forward the complaint to the MPS through the MPA Secretariat.
3. Where an individual is unwilling to make a formal complaint, members will not be able to take any action except in exceptional circumstances. In areas of uncertainty, members may wish to seek the advice and guidance from the Clerk of the Authority.
4. In all instances of complaint, the MPA Secretariat must first make a note of the nature of the complaint as described in the protocol dealing with members' correspondence*, so that the due process can be initiated.
5. The Professional Standards Committee may wish to be kept informed by the MPS of the progress and outcome (e.g. informally resolved, full investigation or sanctions, if any) of all cases put to members. A detailed protocol will need to be drafted with the MPS and Lord Chancellor's Department which would permit the MPA in undertaking its role to 'monitor how complaints are dealt with' without presenting a conflict with the formal process that will be carried out by the Police Appeals Tribunal.

*The MPA Correspondence Protocol that states that all Members correspondence will be logged for administrative purpose.

2. Complaints against individual police officers

1. There is a detailed statutory procedure for dealing with complaints concerning the conduct of individual police officers. This procedure makes different provisions in respect of various ranks. These are outlined below, together with a member's role - if any.

Constables to Superintendents

2. Any complaint in respect of an officer in any of these ranks is officially made to the Commissioner. In practice, such complaints tend to be made in the first instance to the officer of the rank of Inspector in charge of a local police station.
3. Complaints about individual officers should be referred to the MPS. Where complaints are received by the MPA, details of this should be forwarded to through the MPA Secretariat to the MPS.
4. Individual Authority members have no role in the statutory complaints investigation procedure under Section 65. However, section 77 of the Act requires the MPA to keep itself informed of the workings of the complaints system in the Metropolitan Police Service. In order to fulfil its duty under Section 77, the MPA will require full management information from the MPS on the outcome of the complaints process.

ACPO ranks

5. These are the police officers that occupy the ranks from Commander to Commissioner
6. Any complaint in respect of these ranks should be made to the Clerk to the Authority.
7. The only Authority members who have a role in respect of such complaints are those who sit on its Professional Standards Committee, which has responsibility for dealing with complaints against ACPO officers. Prior knowledge of any such complaint might debar a Committee member from taking any part in its deliberations in that particular instance. For that reason, it is important that Authority members should not discuss any such complaints in advance of their being considered by the Professional Standards Committee.

3. Complaints against individual members of the Civil Staff and Special Constables

1. Any complaint against an individual member of the MPS Civil staff or a member of the Special Constabulary should be forwarded to the MPS Secretariat who will forward the complaint to the appropriate MPS BOCU/Head of Department.

4. Principal role of Members in dealing with complaints

1. Authority members should take care to draw a distinction between

• a negative comment or moan (which does not constitute a complaint);
• a complaint about policy or direction, and
• a complaint within the meaning of section 65 of the Act. A member may, of course, pursue an oral complaint as soon as it is made. However, they should make sure that it is committed to writing as soon as possible.

2. The principal role of an Authority member in respect of the making and or receiving complaints is to guide a complainant towards the correct procedure and the appropriate officer with whom to lodge their complaint.
3. However, members must exercise extreme caution in going beyond that limited role. A member must take care to make sure that they are seen by both the complainant and the MPS to maintain their independence.
4. Where a member might wish to act in another capacity, e.g. as an "ordinary" person, a friend, an Assembly member (or constituency member in the case of GLA or local authority councillor) etc., this may be difficult because it could give rise to a potential conflict with their responsibility as a member of the MPA. Where a member might be drawn into an advocacy / support role on behalf of a complainant, they should make sure that it is clear to all involved that they will not be doing so as a member of the Authority. It is also important that members do not lobby or canvas support from members of the Professional Standards Committee, whose role may be compromised by involvement in particular cases.

5. Other complaints

1. Any other complaint should be made to the MPS Secretariat.
2. Where a MPA member wishes to pursue a general complaint, this should be referred to the appropriate Committee, or in an emergency the Committee Chair, so that the matter can be dealt with by the MPS.
3. It may be appropriate for a member to seek information on the progress of an individual complaint. This should be sought from the following officers:

Against an individual police officer

ACPO ranks: Clerk to Authority
Other ranks: MPS Secretariat

Against Civil Staff and Specials 

MPS Secretariat

All other complaints

MPS Secretariat

Appendix 3: High profile/sensitive case guidance

A high profile/sensitive case is a case where one or more of the following criteria are met:

1. it has real potential to attract an award of £50,000 or more (to include multiple claims/claimants), except in the case of Accident Claims when to level would be £100,000;
2. it involves issues of principle and/or financial policy (eg: medical/ill health retirements);
3. it is in nature a test case;
4. it is likely to attract publicity, examples are:

• it involves a well known claimant and/or
• it involves well known witness(es) and/or
• it involves a high-ranking police officer(s) and/or civil staff
• there is a particular public interest in the case(s) (eg: claims of persistent police harassment and racism over a sustained period of time or it arises from a targeted operation).

6. there is a risk that the MPS/MPA will be exposed to public criticism and/or weakness in, or lack of MPS policy, practices or procedures will be revealed;
7. it involves a death in custody – particularly following use of force by police officers;
8. it is likely the settlement will give rise to media comment (eg: because it involves issues which are currently the subject of public debate).

The above criteria apply equally to threatened proceedings, inquests and disciplinary proceedings. The criteria are not exhaustive and there may be occasions where cases not falling in these categories may be referred.

It is recommended that cases meeting the criteria be referred as early as possible even if only brief details are known.

Send an e-mail linking to this page

Feedback