By Gabriel Princewill-
The Independent Police Watchdog needs more powers to impose punitive measures that are capable of effecting measurable change in the police force.
Critics of the framework set up to regulate the police force have been expressing alarm about the findings of a new investigation led by the BBC Shared Data Unit into the efficiency of the police complaints system, found there were often cases when police forces took no further action against officers or staff – despite the watchdog’s recommendations.
AD: Capeesh Restaurant
The findings of the investigations revealed the impotence of the IOPC in effecting meaningful change in the police force through its recommendations for disciplinary measures in the force following its own investigations. The investigation discovered that the IOPC has carried out 1,895 investigations into police cases since it was formed in 2018 to replace the old IPCC (Independent Police Complaints Commission). Of those investigations there were 181 cases where the IOPC felt a reasonable tribunal could find misconduct in respect of the individuals involved, including 11 in Wales involving 19 officers or other police staff.
However, no real punitive measures were implemented from the findings of misconduct , leaving the offending officers escaping the necessary repercussions of their transgressions. Continuous misconduct with impunity is regarded as one of the main reasons police officers in the Uk continue to behave waywardly.
A major weakness of the IOPC has been stated to be its lacks of legal authority to punish officers directly. The regulator is restricted to the active measures it can enforce against police forces, generally recommending officers to launch their own tribunals, and decide which officers and other staff can be penalized and dismissed following the evidencing of misconduct.
AD: Oysterian Sea Food Restaurant And Bar
According to the findings of an exhaustive report causing concern, misconduct panels of forces in Wales and England have in 43% of cases taken no further action against officers, and in 34% of cases taken no action against staff, most commonly because of their conclusion that no misconduct had taken place.
One case cited was a 2018 investigation into North Wales Police conduct, after a woman was murdered by her former partner in July 2016. The IOPC investigated previous police reports made by the victim and recommended that three officers face misconduct proceedings. The force agreed, but those officers were shamefully later cleared at disciplinary hearings.
In other cases, misconduct panels have taken no further action because officers or staff had already left the police force. This has taken place in a number of cases.
Last year, a committee of MPs launched a new inquiry into the effectiveness of the watchdog, in light of concerns that investigations were not sufficiently effective, speedy, or just.
Mr Donald said he hoped the MPs’ findings would “establish a fairer system for all”.
He said: “For years we have been concerned over the time it takes to conclude police disciplinary investigations,” he said. “Protracted and disproportionate misconduct investigations have ruined the lives of too many police officers and their families, by damaging their mental health due to the stress.
“Additionally, delays are detrimental to public confidence in the system, with complainants also being affected by any delays.”
But Kathie Cashell, the IOPC’s director of strategy and impact, said she rejected claims the watchdog too often investigates “vexatious allegations” – claims without any real merit, often made as the result of a personal grievance – against the police.
“We have published three years of outcomes data – that shows we investigated nearly 1,800 subjects,” she said. “We found there was a case to answer in 35 per cent of those.
“When you look at things that stopped short of misconduct proceedings – so unsatisfactory performance or reflective action procedures – 60 per cent of the individuals we investigated needed some form of action after those cases.
“Police forces agreed with us on 64 per cent of occasions. I just don’t see where the evidence is that the IOPC is pursuing vexatious allegations.”
In those cases, panels gave 18 final written warnings, 57 written warnings, took management action in 50 cases and took no further action in 12 cases.
For gross misconduct, disciplinary panels dismissed 55 police officers without notice, gave 36 final written warnings and four written warnings.
Hampshire Misconduct
Hampshire police is one of the most racist police forces in the Uk. Three cases have been investigated by the IOPC in the same time period.
In all three of the subsequent reports, investigators found at least one officer or member of police staff had a case to answer for misconduct and advised the force to hold a disciplinary panel.
In one instance, an officer was accused of using discriminatory language as he was recorded saying: “I know you’re Aldershot because you’re black and you stick out like a sore thumb” to a young man who attended an Aldershot Town match in 2018.
In December 2020, six members of the force’s serious organized crime unit were found guilty of gross misconduct after a covert bug recorded them regularly making offensive remarks, including wishing death on foreigners. An investigation found that part of the office where a black officer worked was called “Africa corner”.
A male sergeant used the N-word and a homophobic slur in phone messages with the female colleague, but escaped disciplinary action because he resigned from the force before the tribunal hearing. Representatives of the IOPC pointed out to The Eye Of Media.Com that the fact the officer in question will never be able to work in the police force again means he did not escape disciplinary action.
The chief constable of Hampshire police, Olivia Pinkney, who chaired the hearing, said the former officer, identified only as X, would have been dismissed had he not resigned from the force.
The investigation further found the officer in question “may have behaved in an aggressive manner” towards other young people who also attended the match, ultimately summarizing that he may have committed misconduct. At the subsequent meeting held in spring 2019 it was ruled that the officer had been offensive to the young man, but despite the IOPC’s findings, no further action was taken.
In a separate incident in 2015, a woman called the police at 4am requesting assistance for her son, who had bipolar disorder and was suicidal.
The call handler was informed that her son was in the swimming pool at her house, yet the handler made the decision not to deploy officers to the scene, instead calling an ambulance. The woman’s son subsequently drowned.
The IOPC found the call handler had a case to answer for misconduct, with management action and further training the decided outcome.
In fact, in all three of the cases – which resulted in two deaths and one serious allegation of discriminatory language – management action and further training was the highest course of action taken.
As per IOPC guidance introduced in 2020, each of the three cases investigated in Hampshire would now warrant “at least a written warning” if they were heard at present day.
Responding to questions on why harsher action wasn’t taken at the time, a spokesperson for Hampshire Police said: “Police misconduct processes are clearly set out in the Police Conduct Regulations which all forces use when considering cases of misconduct. The regulations were updated in 2020, which is also when the IOPC statutory guidance was introduced.
“The three cases referred to were heard under the Police Conduct Regulations in place at the time, which provided five available outcomes at a misconduct hearing with the lowest sanction available being management advice if misconduct is proven. This was changed under the 2020 regulations with only written warnings and final written warnings being available.
“Each case is assessed individually on the information obtained during the investigation, which includes obtaining statements and conducting interviews with all affected parties, analysis of police data and reviewing force policies and procedures. The information is then put before a misconduct panel, which considers all of the evidence and determines the appropriate outcome.
“Hampshire Constabulary has robust procedures in place to deal with misconduct. We are absolutely clear that all officers and staff must adhere to the standards of behaviour expected of them due to their positions within society and we are proactive in taking action against those who fall below those standards. It is important to understand that the complaints process is much broader than just misconduct, and sometimes incidents require different outcomes to be taken, for example whether improvements should be made and implementing any learning or recommendations identified.”
An IOPC director said the reason so many officers did not face further action could have been because individual misconduct panels held by police forces required a ‘higher threshold’ to find misconduct proven than the IOPC investigators.
She also said police forces often frustrated proceedings by providing only a written statement instead of an interview.
Effectiveness Of IOPC
The Home Affairs Select Committee launched a new inquiry into the effectiveness of the IOPC at the start of 2021. Deborah Coles, executive director of INQUEST, a charity which provides expertise on state-related deaths and their investigation, spoke and gave evidence at the first hearing in January.
She told the committee that sanctions against police officers were too rare and the lack of punishment risked undermining confidence in policing.
This criticism, she said, also extended to the fact that very few serving police officers had faced criminal proceedings for alleged offences carried out in the line of duty.
Speaking at the same hearing, Police Federation of England and Wales National Vice Chair Ché Donald said: “In January we gave evidence to Home Affairs Select Committee as part of its inquiry into the Independent Office for Police Conduct and the police complaints system.
“For years we have been concerned over the time it takes to conclude police disciplinary investigations. Protracted and disproportionate misconduct investigations have ruined the lives of too many police officers and their families, by damaging their mental health due to the stress.
“Additionally, delays are detrimental to public confidence in the system, with complainants also being affected by any delays.
“We are continuing to press the Government to introduce legislation which would give legally qualified persons power to impose deadlines when police disciplinary investigations hit the one-year mark as part of our Time Limits campaign.
“It is vital we have an independent, impartial body that has oversight over policing so officers are rightly held accountable for their actions, but the IOPC often inexplicably pursues vexatious allegations, which may be a reason why a significant proportion of cases have resulted in no further action.
“We hope the findings from the committee will be used to make a tangible difference and establish a fairer system for all.”
“The IOPC is one player in the police complaints system, and with better cooperation we can improve the timeliness of proceedings. I think cultural change within the complaint system itself and policing is needed so it is not so defensive when things go wrong. We need a police force that is really open to working to resolve those issues, to really listening and to taking the opportunity to learn. We want it to become the norm for people to call out behaviour that does not meet professional standards and that happens from within.
Director of strategy and impact at IOPC, Kathie Cashell, said: “It is a really complex system and there is a power balance between the complainants and the complained about. There is a lot more the system can do to support that. There is a question as to whether there should be more support, more advocacy for people going through that complaints process.”
AD: Heritage And Restaurant Lounge Bar