Police confidence
40. The police staff associations were deeply concerned
about the low level of confidence which police officers have in
the Ombudsman. Between January-March 2003, the Northern Ireland
Statistics Research Agency carried out a survey for the Ombudsman
which examined police officers' attitudes to the Police Ombudsman
and the new complaints system. The results illustrated a serious
lack of confidence among officers in the Ombudsman. While 58%
of officers thought that complaints against them should be independently
investigated, 44% felt that the Ombudsman was not doing a good
job in dealing with complaints against the police; 42% thought
that the Office is 'out to get them', and 70% thought that the
Office did not approach both the person making a complaint and
the officer complained about with an open mind.
41. Mrs O'Loan acknowledged that the results of the
2003 survey indicated that "more needs to be done to strengthen
police officers' awareness and confidence in the Office".[84]
She also accepted that the level of knowledge and understanding
of the role of the Ombudsman among junior ranks of the PSNI was
still not as extensive as it should be, but that the PSNI is "committed
to enhancing officers' understanding of the complaints system".[85]
The Ombudsman, the PSNI and the police staff associations have
agreed to form a joint committee to work to address the problems
raised by the results of the survey.[86]
The joint committee is currently looking at ways to improve communication
between police officers and the Ombudsman and a series of activities
have been agreed. The Ombudsman told us that she had been invited
by the Police Federation for Northern Ireland to attend their
annual general meeting in September 2004.[87]
42. The evidence we received indicates that police
officers' lack of confidence is, in part, rooted in their perception
that the Ombudsman is not impartial. The Superintendents Association
told us that police officers "feel that the Ombudsman's staff
are blinded by a search for evidence of collusion and corruption"
rather than "investigating a complaint holistically and finding
those things that prove whether the officer has done anything
wrong or not".[88]
The view of the Police Federation was that the new complaints
system weighed in favour of the complainant and that this affected
police officers' confidence:
"…officers believe that the Ombudsman's
Office is not even-handed and impartial in the way in which they
deal with complaints against the police. Officers believe that
investigators from that Office are more likely to believe the
complainant every time than they are to believe what the police
officer has to say."[89]
43. Mrs O'Loan recognised that her Office still had
"a lot of work to do" to improve police officers' perceptions
of her impartiality.[90]
We welcome the Police Ombudsman's acceptance that more needs
to be done by her Office to gain the confidence of rank and file
PSNI officers. Mr Pollock argued that because the Office oversees
the conduct of members of the police, it was difficult to convince
police officers of the Office's fairness.[91]
The Northern Ireland Office considered that the relationship between
the police and the Police Ombudsman would have inevitable tension:
"Inevitably in any relationship between a complaints
investigation agency and the organisation it investigates (and
the representative bodies of its members) there will be a healthy
tension at times. However, it is important that everyone is aware
of their responsibilities and obligations, and that the relationship
remains such that it benefits the policing arrangements provided
to the community in Northern Ireland".[92]
The Citizens Advice Bureau felt that, given the
divided nature of Northern Ireland society, "the Police Ombudsman
has had a very difficult brief in seeking to establish the independence
and impartiality of her office."[93]
44. Securing the confidence of both the public
and police is crucial to the credibility of the new police complaints
system. We were told that the Ombudsman has actively engaged with
the public, securing a high level of confidence in both communities
in Northern Ireland.
45. Developing trust on the part of the police
in Northern Ireland in the Office of the Police Ombudsman depends
on a positive and proactive approach by the top managements of
the police and the Office, and we are satisfied that substantial
efforts are being made by both in this direction. While we acknowledge
the particular difficulty of the Ombudsman's task in securing
the trust of rank and file police officers, we are concerned about
the low level of confidence which police officers appear to have
in the Ombudsman and, in particular, their perception that the
system is neither impartial nor fair. Everything possible must
be done to improve officers' confidence in the present system
of complaints. We warmly welcome the agreement between the PSNI,
police staff associations, and Ombudsman to work jointly to improve
confidence. This is a solid start on which we expect all parties
to build.
46. We received a small number of representations
from former police officers and others who had been the subject
of, or involved in, the Ombudsman's investigations and who expressed
dissatisfaction with aspects of their treatment by her Office.
We wish to make it clear that the remit of this committee does
not extend to the consideration of individual cases, and we can
make no comment on the merit of those which have been raised with
us, or the treatment of individuals by the Office in the course
of its investigations. However, a number of points of practice
arise from these cases which are of great importance in furthering
the work of establishing the Office on a secure foundation.
47. First, the Office must ensure that those who
are under investigation, or who have standing in an investigation
even if not formally its subject, are kept fully and regularly
informed of progress. Second, the Office's investigations must
be conducted to the highest standards. Third, investigations must
be completed in a timely fashion. The Office has a target of updating
" both complainants and officers every six weeks"; and
has committed itself to conduct investigations "thoroughly
in accordance with the law to ensure an effective 'search for
the truth'".[94]
48. We are pleased that the Ombudsman has committed
the Office to proceeding with its work on the basis of high standards,
though we note that she describes the target of six-weekly updates
as "challenging", and points to the modest size of the
Office when faced with complex and time consuming investigations.[95]
The importance of a fully efficient IT system as an essential
support in achieving the highest standards of performance is a
point Mrs O'Loan also stresses.[96]
While the outcome of investigations conducted by the Ombudsman
are a matter for her Office, it is vital that in all respects
the manner in which these investigations are conducted represent
the highest professional standards, and it appears that she is
seeking to achieve this goal. We warmly support such an approach
and, in particular, commend the Office for seeking to keep complainants
and officers fully informed as work progresses. We have heard
complaints in other inquiries that this is not done sufficiently
in police investigations, and a punctilious adherence to this
practice will enable the Ombudsman to set a 'gold standard' for
procedure in this area.
Independent oversight of the
Office
49. The police staff associations were greatly concerned
about the absence, in their view, of an independent dedicated
body to which they could make a complaint of maladministration
against the Ombudsman. However, the Northern Ireland Office (NIO)
explained that "ad hoc arrangements" had been put in
place which allow members of the public or police officers to
write to the NIO where they have made a maladministration complaint
to the Ombudsman, but remain dissatisfied with the response.[97]
In such cases, the Department will seek clarification from the
Ombudsman. If there is prima facie evidence of maladministration,
the Department can choose to refer the complaint to an independent
person for investigation. To date, the Northern Ireland Office
has not considered it necessary to invoke this arrangement for
independent investigation.[98]
50. We were surprised to learn from the Department
that complaints referred to it for examination, are considered
not at Ministerial level, but by officials only.[99]
Mr Ian Pearson, the Minister, appeared not to have been fully
briefed on how such complaints were handled, but said that the
present arrangements were not satisfactory.[100]After
we finished taking the evidence for this inquiry, Mr Pearson confirmed
that the Department had put in place arrangements to ensure that
complaints of maladministration made against the Ombudsman will
be seen invariably, and in detail, by a Minister.[101]
51. It is most important that charges against
the Ombudsman of maladministration and decisions over possible
referrals to an independent person, should be taken at Ministerial
level. We were alarmed that the Minister had not been briefed
on the relevant procedures until the point at which we questioned
him, and welcome the assurance that we have been given that in
future all such papers will be seen at Ministerial level. We also
recommend that the Department should record the number of such
complaints it receives, and indicate the outcome in general terms,
in the Departmental Annual Report as a matter of routine. We consider
that this would aid transparency and improve confidence in the
present arrangements.
52. The Superintendents Association felt that there
should be "an independent person to investigate" and
"to have oversight" of the Ombudsman.[102]
The Association thought that appointing someone on an ad hoc basis
to conduct investigations was not "rigorous enough for police
officers to have confidence in the Police Ombudsman".[103]
They told us that only a small number of complaints had been made
by police officers to the Northern Ireland Office because of a
lack of faith in the system and a belief that the complaint "will
simply bounce from the Secretary of State back to the Ombudsman's
Office so there is no point in complaining in the first place."[104]
The Police Federation told us that they did not wish for "every
action" of the Ombudsman to be subject to oversight, but
they were seeking a mechanism that would allow an officer, who
was unhappy about the way he was dealt with, to refer the complaint.[105]
53. Sir Desmond Rea, Chairman of the Northern Ireland
Policing Board, told us that some Board members felt that there
is a need for "a further accountability mechanism" for
the Ombudsman.[106]
He said that the Board had discussed with the Ombudsman the possibility
of creating "an appeal process outside the current judicial
review process" which would allow matters of process to be
appealed to the Northern Ireland Ombudsman.[107]
However, the PSNI were not convinced that one Ombudsman should
have oversight of another.[108]
The Northern Ireland Office appeared equally sceptical. [109]
54. Mrs O'Loan was satisfied that the Office was
subject to adequate checks and balances. She pointed to the wide
range of accountability mechanisms which her Office is subject
to, including:, Parliament; complaint to the Secretary of State
(maladministration); the Criminal Justice Inspector; the Comptroller
and Auditor General; and the Commissioner for Children and Young
People in Northern Ireland.[110]
She was concerned that the facility for independent investigation
of maladministration complaints was not completely understood
by the police, and that the Office "was trying to engage
with the police" to ensure that they understood the process.[111]
She did not express a view on whether the Office should be under
further accountability, stating that it would be "a matter
for Parliament to decide".[112]
55. If there is prima facie evidence of maladministration,
the Northern Ireland Office can refer the complaint to an independent
person for investigation. This system is largely untried as no
referrals have yet been made by the Department to any independent
person. We think that the present arrangements should be given
the chance to 'bed down', subject to the government accepting
our recommendations above.
56. We were told that the Ombudsman is currently
engaging with the police to ensure that they understand the process
for independent investigation.[113]
We welcome this, and we also consider that there is a
role here for the government to ensure that all those who may
use the system are fully aware of it, and its operation. However,
if it becomes clear that, after a reasonable time, the present
arrangements are continuing to cause unease and are failing to
gain general respect and acceptance, then the government must
consider what alternative procedures may be put in place to provide
assurance that complaints of maladministration against the Ombudsman
will be investigated fully and fairly.
74 Q 1 Back
75
PONI 6 Para 10 Back
76
Q1, Report 2: Public awareness of the system for complaints against
the police in Northern Ireland, January 2004, The Police Ombudsman
for Northern Ireland PP 13 - 17 http://www.policeombudsman.org/Publication.cfm?catID=6&action=archive&level=page&year=2004 Back
77
PONI 6 p 1 Back
78
PONI12 Back
79
PONI 8 P 3 Back
80
PONI 17 Back
81
PONI 13 Back
82
PONI 28 p 1 Back
83
Q 166 Back
84
PONI 6 para 18 Back
85
PONI 6 para 18 Back
86
PONI 6 para 18 Back
87
PONI 6B Back
88
Q 116 Back
89
Q 156 Back
90
Q 28 Back
91
Q 29 Back
92
PONI 27 para 11 Back
93
PONI 8 p 2 Back
94
PONI 6 , paras 43 and 44 Back
95
PONI 6 , paras 40 and 44 Back
96
PONI 6 , para 44 Back
97
PONI 27 para 25 Back
98
PONI 27 para 25 Back
99
Q 194 Back
100
Q 194 Back
101
Q 118, HC 108-ii Back
102
Qq 117, 129 Back
103
Qq 117, 129 Back
104
Q 141 Back
105
Q 129 Back
106
Q 83 Back
107
Q 82 Back
108
Q 83 Back
109
PONI 27 Back
110
Q 59 Back
111
Q 61 Back
112
Q 59 Back
113
Q 61 Back
