By Gabriel Princewill-
Vetting standards for police officers bolstered under revised Code of Practice is inadequate, The Eye Of Media.Com can reveal.
The new vetting procedures are substantial improvement from the past, but not sufficiently robust to achieve all its overarching objectives.
AD: Capeesh Restaurant
The new vetting procedures does not include any strong deterrent to new recruits ensuring prosecution for racism or homophobia, both of which have been prevalent in the force, and fall under hate crimes in the Uk statute.
The new system also lacks as a deterrent for new recruits, the imposition of fines against offending officers in addition to dismissal, to signal its commitment to eradicating corruption in the police force. Its current additional measures are an improvement on its past, but fails to take into account the importance of completely rooting out corruption from the force
The British government is trying to ensure a more honourable police force in a major transition from the embarrassing pool of rotten police officers that have occupied a noble post and brought the profession to disrepute.
AD: Oysterian Sea Food Restaurant And Bar
The College of Policing’s Vetting Code of Practice was updated on Thursday, replacing the 2017 Code, to ensure officers who are unfit to serve the public can be rooted out, and to make clear chief constables are responsible for holding their forces to high vetting standards.
The Government said the updated Vetting Code of Practice is one part of its drive to rebuild standards in policing.
The new changes were inspired by the Louise Carey report was commissioned after the kidnap, rape and murder two years ago of a London woman, Sarah Everard, by serving Metropolitan Police officer Wayne Couzens.
The report found the Metropolitan police to be institutionally racist and homophobic- an echo of the pronouncement made by the Mcpherson report following the murder of Stephen Lawrence in 1993.
The finding was a bitter blow for the Home Office, which up until then had been blissfully ignorant of the state of its police force, and operating in denial.
Home Secretary, Suella Braverman has since asked the College of Policing to strengthen the Vetting Code of Practice following concerns raised by the case of David Carrick earlier this year, with the update making clear there is an expectation that chief constables are responsible for holding their forces to these high vetting standards.
Braverman is also launching a review into the police dismissals process to ensure it is as effective as possible at removing unfit officers, while the Angiolini Inquiry will look at uncovering any further systemic issues in policing we need to address.
According to the Home Office, the revised Code sets out 18 expectations for chief officers, including the requirement for re-joiners to be fully re-vetted and for forces to provide all relevant information on an officer transferring to another force.
The code provides clarity that failure to hold minimum vetting clearance should lead to dismissal proceedings, and an officer’s vetting should be reviewed following the conclusion of misconduct proceedings that do not end in a dismissal.
Clarity
It recommended that the Vetting Code of Practice should be amended to provide clarity on some areas of concern, while also highlighting that issues in vetting predominantly lie with current vetting standards not being adhered to, rather than the framework itself.
Domestic Abuse
The new measures also takes into account disturbing revelations by the Met in January that 1,071 of its own officers had been or were under investigation for domestic abuse and violence against women and girls.
Under the changes, officers will face dismissal if they fail to hold minimum vetting clearance, and an officer’s vetting would be reviewed following the conclusion of misconduct proceedings that do not end in a dismissal.
A number of forces are acting proactively to improve the quality of the force.
Panel member and chief executive of York-based charity for sexual abuse survivors Mags Godderidge recently asked for reassurances that examining intelligence about staff and officers was an ongoing process.
She also questioned how new intelligence coming into the force about officers was being treated, so that action was being taken when necessary.
Police, fire and crime commissioner Zoe Metcalfe said she sought regular verbal and written assurances from the chief constable over the vetting process.
Ms Winward said all evidence on the national database are examined, even if uncorroborated, and if any potential issues appeared North Yorkshire Police’s professional standards followed it up with actions such as interviewing the officer or staff member concerned.
She added: “There’s a lot of assurance here in North Yorkshire that we are following up on all relevant information about an officer, even if it’s uncorroborated, so we make sure we look into those matters.”
Ms Winward said she was “more than happy” to provide the number of officers and staff who were currently suspended as a result of investigations, before adding: “It’s not a huge number”.
She added: “I would like to stress that suspension is a neutral act, so it’s done to protect the officer, staff member and the public while an investigation is undertaken, so it’s not an expression of guilt or an expression of us believing that person is guilty of that matter being accused of them.
Ms Winward, said some officers or staff members had appeared before accelerated misconduct hearings and been dismissed and that details about the outcomes were available on the force’s website.
The British public can be optimistic for a marked change in the competence and integrity of policing, but not enough has been put in place to make that change dramatic and comprehensive enough to be worth relief or celebration.
AD: Heritage And Restaurant Lounge Bar