APPENDIX 6
Memorandum submitted by the Institute
for Conflict Research
EXTRACT FROM POLICING, ACCOUNTABILITY AND
YOUNG PEOPLE
by Jennifer Hamilton, Katy Radford and Neil
Jarman
April 2003
SECTION 2
METHODOLOGY
The research focused on young people's attitudes
and experiences of policing in Northern Ireland and especially
on the process of making complaints against officers in the PSNI.
The research was initiated by the Police Ombudsman's Office to
look at all aspects of young people's attitudes to and knowledge
of the complaints process. The methods adopted included both qualitative
(focus groups and interviews) and quantitative (questionnaires)
enabling a larger sample of opinions to be obtained.
Three main issues were addressed throughout
the research:
1. The attitudes of young people to the PSNI,
their experiences of that service, any differences that have been
noted between the PSNI and the RUC and the scale and nature of
problems that they have experienced in interacting with the PSNI;
2. The attitudes of young people to the Office
of the Police Ombudsman for Northern Ireland: their knowledge
of that Office, its work and responsibilities, their experience
of making complaints about the police and any changes that they
feel could be made to the system of reporting or processing complaints;
and
3. The attitudes and knowledge of young people
to the Policing Board and DPPs.
The research involved:
— a broad range of focus groups and
self completion questionnaires covering the experiences of all
major communities;
— both urban and more-rural locations;
— the experiences of both males and
females; and
— the views of minority ethnic communities
and socially excluded young people.
The self-completion questionnaires were delivered
to a broad and representative range of educational establishments,
including secondary schools, Further and Higher Education Colleges,
training centres and the universities. Youth Councils, community
youth groups, training schemes and the young offenders' centre
were also targeted.
Focus groups were held in 18 locations, with
31 groups completed and a total of 242 participants. The groups
were mainly composed of young people of mixed gender and background
although some groups were single identity.
DEMOGRAPHIC BREAKDOWN
OF SURVEY
RESPONDENTS
The participants selected for investigation
were between 16 and 24 years of age although some participants
were below the age of 16 (10%). In total 1,163 young people completed
the survey between November 2002 and February 2003. The sample
consisted of 554 males (48%) and 609 females (52%). All 29 DCUs
were represented in the survey.
Of the 1,163 people surveyed 567 (49%) considered
themselves to be Catholic and 524 (45%) Protestant. These proportions
correspond with the 2001 Census results, which reveal that 50%
of 16-24 year olds identify themselves as Catholic and 46% as
Protestant. Sixty-seven people (6%) considered themselves to be
in the other category.
The majority of the sample (1,134, 98%) classified
themselves as having a white ethnic background, while 1% (13)
was Chinese. The sample also included small numbers of individuals
from other ethnic backgrounds. This is broadly in line with the
ethnic breakdown of the Northern Ireland population according
to the data from the 2001 Census.
SECTION 5
POLICE OMBUDSMAN FOR NORTHERN IRELAND
5.1 Quantitative Findings
Fifty-seven people who completed the questionnaire
(5% of the sample) said they had made a complaint about the police
in the past 12 months (although 94 respondents (8% of the sample)
said they had made a formal complaint about police behaviour at
some stage). This number represents just over 23% of those people
who reported that they had experienced unacceptable behaviour
from the police. While this is a relatively low figure, it is
however slightly higher than the findings of the recent PONI surveys.
These have indicated that around 17% of people who had experienced
unacceptable behaviour had lodged a formal complaint (see Section
1.2 above). Table 17 shows where complaints had been lodged by
the complainants.
Table 17
ORGANISATION WHERE COMPLAINT WAS LODGED
| Organisation |
Frequency | Percentage
|
| Local Police Station | 24 |
26 |
| Solicitor | 19 | 20
|
| Police Ombudsman | 15 | 16
|
| Chief Constable | 4 | 4
|
| MP/MLA/Councillor | 4 | 4
|
| Other | 2 | 2
|
| Did not know who to complain to | 2
| 2 |
| Did not know how to complain | 1
| 1 |
| Don't know | 1 | 1
|
| CAB | 0 | 0
|
| | |
(Participants were allowed to tick more than one, some participants
who had made a complaint did not respond to this question.)
Over half (52%) of respondents had heard of the Police Ombudsman
Office with awareness being greater among older participants (72%
of 22-24 year olds were aware of the Police Ombudsman compared
to only 27% of under 16s) and those within the higher education
brackets (70% with an HND or degree compared to 33% who had no
formal qualification). Awareness had mainly come through television
(40%) and the focus group discussions also revealed that the media
reports concerning the Omagh bomb investigation had increased
young people's awareness.
Nearly three quarters (72%) of those who had heard of the
Police Ombudsman recognised her role as being "to investigate
complaints against the police". Table 18 shows the responses
received.
Table 18
WHAT DO YOU THINK THE ROLE OF THE POLICE OMBUDSMAN IS?
| Role | Frequency
| Percentage |
| To investigate complaints against the police
| 494 | 72 |
| To receive complaints | 173
| 25 |
| Don't know | 83 | 12
|
| To investigate complaints by the police |
67 | 10 |
| To protect the police from investigation |
21 | 3 |
| | |
(Participants were allowed to tick more than one.)
Only 11% of the respondents (130 people) said they knew how
to contact the Police Ombudsman if they had a complaint concerning
the PSNI with only 2% (24 people) ever having contacted the Office
directly.
Just over one quarter (26%) of those who had made a complaint
to any of the relevant bodies said that they were happy with the
service they had received. Three main reasons were cited by those
who were unhappy with the service they had received:
— the process took too long (21%);
— the complaint was not taken seriously and (21%);
and
— the complainant did not hear anything after making
the complaint (21%).
Slightly more people were happy with the service they had
received from the Police Ombudsman: 38% (eight people) said they
were happy with the service. Three people omitted to answer whether
or not they were happy with the service. Of the 62% (13 people)
who were not happy with the service the two main reasons given
for their dissatisfaction were:
— a slow response (33%); and
— the feeling that their complaint was not taken
seriously (33%).
This feeling was echoed in the discussion groups where young
people felt that their complaint would not be taken seriously
and therefore were discouraged from complaining formally. Also
for the 33% who had a complaint but chose not to complain 5,900
felt that the police would not do anything therefore their efforts
would be wasted.
The series of questions regarding opinions of the Police
Ombudsman show that the majority of respondents opted for the
neither agree nor disagree option. Table 19 illustrates the responses
given to the questions and between 23% and 47% agreed or strongly
agreed with the various statements viewing the Police Ombudsman's
Office in a positive way. When these responses were crosstabulated
with community background few differences were noted between Catholics
and Protestants. However, one exception was noted with more Catholics
agreeing that the Police Ombudsman was necessary (57% compared
to 43% among the Protestant community).
Table 19
OPINIONS ABOUT THE POLICE OMBUDSMAN
| Statement | Strongly
Agree
| Agree | Neither
| Disagree | Strongly
Disagree
|
| Police Ombudsman will help Police do a better job
| 4 | 28 | 49 |
9 | 3 |
| Police Ombudsman is impartial | 3
| 20 | 58 | 9 |
4 |
| Police Ombudsman is independent of the police
| 4 | 24 | 55 |
9 | 3 |
| Police Ombudsman treats aperson complaining fairly
| 3 | 24 | 58 |
6 | 3 |
Police Ombudsman investigates complaints against
the police fairly
| 3 | 22 | 58 |
9 | 3 |
| Police Ombudsman is necessary | 18
| 29 | 42 | 3 |
3 |
Police Ombudsman can help change the police and
make it more acceptable
| 6 | 27 | 51 |
7 | 4 |
| | |
| | |
5.2 Attitudes and Knowledge of Police Ombudsman
The Police Ombudsman's Office was not considered to be easily
accessible and for those people living outside Belfast it was
felt that it "was bound to be Belfast-based". Some were
aware of the organisation and the gender of the Police Ombudsman
with a few aware of her name, "Nuala Pot Noodle?" cracked
one person. Some were unclear about the role and work of the Office,
although 72% in the survey had a clear indication of her role
defining it as "investigating complaints against the police".
Knowledge centred on the basis of highly publicised events,
"Isn't she something to do with the police and the Omagh
bomb?" (Monkstown).
One young woman who worked in the Citizens' Advice Bureau
(CAB) told her group that the Police Ombudsman's Office was impartial
and,
"if you have a complaint they look into it . . . they
use our Offices for interviews" (Omagh).
However, none of the other group members were aware that
this was the case, and none of the young people who had made a
complaint against the police had done it through a Citizen's Advice
Bureau (Table 17). This highlights a basic lack of knowledge of
the Police Ombudsman's operations and procedures even if there
is a general awareness of the office and of its role. There was
also a belief that attempting to use the Office as part of the
process of rebuilding confidence in the police was flawed,
"There's been such a history of abuse to both Catholics
and Protestants from the police that it will take more to correct
this than setting up an Ombudsman's Office." (Glengormley).
Those who did know about the Police Ombudsman's Office frequently
assumed that it was there to "Police the Police" and
when they were more familiar with the role there was a degree
of scepticism about its impartiality and efficacy,
"It's pointless to complain, no-one will listen, it's
their word against mine" (Belfast).
However, the survey indicated that the Police Ombudsman's
Office is generally viewed in a positive way as shown in Table
19. Some within the focus groups who knew of the Office did however
feel that there was an inbuilt relationship between the police
and the Ombudsman and this in turn led to a lack of trust within
the system,
"you wouldn't feel safe giving details, you don't know
who would get hold of it" (Hazelwood).
"I wouldn't trust information as being safe" (Hazelwood).
"It would be my word against theirs" (Glengormley).
"They'd just stick up for their colleagues" (Belfast).
"The courts will always believe the Police"(Belfast).
In addition, the lack of impartiality was compounded by a
fundamental belief among some young people of collusion between
the police and loyalists, which would have implications particularly
for those within nationalist and loyalist communities. Many therefore
felt there would be little point in making any complaints and
the police's position over minor complaints would stand,
"they would only say there were sitting outside your
house reading a paper or doing normal checks" (Belfast).
For those who were familiar with the aims of the Police Ombudsman,
there was a degree of scepticism about the Office's accountability.
A number of positive suggestions were made to enable the Office
to be seen to be more transparent. These will be considered more
fully in Section 7, but they included suggestions that there should
be "more feedback" (Portadown), and that the Office
"should ensure people know when police officers are reprimanded"
(Hydebank).
While many understood the organisation to be a separate body
to the PSNI, the incorporation of the name Police into the Ombudsman's
title undermined its perceived impartiality. This concern was
compounded by the expectation of some that people working at the
Police Ombudsman's Office would be former police officers or people
who have worked in law enforcement. It was felt that the "set
a thief to catch a thief" attitude was not without complications
in the form of built-in prejudices and biases.
5.3 Experiences of the Police Ombudsman
As has already been noted some people had a basic knowledge
of the Police Ombudsman's Office while those who had made a complaint
about the police (either current or past) had a greater knowledge.
The experiences that were expressed were based on either actual
or perceived knowledge of the Office and of the handling of a
complaint. Much of the discussion concerning experiences was also
based upon the Omagh bomb investigation—for many this was
the first time they had heard of the Police Ombudsman's Office.
A nurnber of leading news items in the days prior to focus groups
being conducted often reflected the participants' only understanding
of the organisations. For the Office, Omagh was a frequently cited
instance, though many had heard the name they had not absorbed
the information in the news bulletins. Subsequently, their acquaintance
with these bodies was scant and while the name was recognised
there was no deeper knowledge. In fact young people's knowledge
and insight into the workings of such public bodies was minimal
and frequently non-existent. What limited knowledge there was
frequently proved to be inaccurate. Comments such as "Aren't
they something to do with the marches?" (Larne) or "They're
there to protect the police" (Glengormley) were not uncommon.
Many of the participants perceived that complaining about
police behaviour and treatment would be a "waste of time"
unless the complaint was about something serious,
Young person 1 "I reckon at the end of the
day she probably gets loads and loads (of complaints) and she
(Police Ombudsman) probably wouldn't take yours into account unless
it was really serious."
Young person 2 "If it wasn't serious you wouldn't
bother."
Others felt that complaining, no matter what the nature of
the incident, would not be worthwhile,
"they would never go against the police, the courts will
always believe the police anyway" (Belfast).
One young male who had put a complaint through to the Office
via his solicitor felt that it had been worthwhile,
"Well it all adds up I mean if one person complains and
another person complains soon it will be hundreds and you have
to let them know what is actually happening" (Belfast).
However another young male felt that his experience was very
different,
"It was like complaining to a wall because nothing was
going to be done about it anyway . . . the police will just deny
it or say there was no evidence to prove it" (Belfast).
Two members of one group in a loyalist area of Belfast had
made complaints to the Police Ombudsman's Office but both said
bluntly "Fuck all happened". When the facilitator probed
the boys about the issue it became clear that something had happened
but the outcome was not what they had desired, "we only got
a letter . . . but me ma opened it".
The involvement of parents in the complaints process was
common with some young people not fully aware of the process or
the outcome. Another individual felt his complaint was "a
waste of time" as he only had one brief meeting, and this
did not produce a favourable outcome,
"I was only at one meeting and my case was closed after
that meeting it was only on for about half an hour" (Belfast).
It is difficult to comment on any of these individuals' experiences,
as so often experiences are shaped by the final outcome and for
many people who do not receive the outcome they desire their experiences,
no matter how good, end up being negative. This was the case for
the respondent, who complained about the length of his meeting,
Researcher: "Would you have been impressed (with
the Police Ombudsman's Office) if the outcome had been dfferent?
Yes, if they still had my case going and if there had been
something carried out, like a charge against the police, instead
of just saying "aye right you got hit that was it" and
close the case" (Belfast).
Some individuals also said that they were hesitant of complaining
due to fear of reprisals,
"if you make a complaint against the police . . . they
are going to watch you even more" (Belfast).
"They would aggravate you and watch you even more if
you did complain" (Dungannon).
Some young people even commented that they would not feel
safe handing over information "you wouldn't know who would
get hold of it". This suggests that some young people do
not see the Police Ombudsman as being an independent body. A NISRA
survey (February 2002) found that 18% of 16-24 year olds viewed
the Police Ombudsman as part of the police, while 71% considered
it to be independent. The survey within this research indicated
that only 28% agreed that the Police Ombudsman was independent
with over half of respondents opting for the neutral response
(see Table 19).
For those who had no direct experience of the Office there
was a sense of the unknown and confusion at how the complaint
would be dealt with. Questions were asked such as "would
they listen and how would they investigate?" and "would
our complaint be investigated properly?". This led the young
people to recommend that the Office should be more widely publicised
and suggestions were made as to how knowledge could be increased.
5.4 Complaining
Experiences of the PSNI had led some individuals to make
complaints whilst others, with similar experiences had either
decided not to complain or did not know how to complain,
"I didn't make a complaint, to be truthful I didn't really
know what way to go about it" (Glengormley).
The reasons for and against complaining were discussed within
the groups and various opinions were put forward. This section
will discuss the issue of complaining against the PSNI and the
complainants' views on the procedure.
Ramifications of making complaints
There was a prevalent culture demonstrated by the majority
of focus group participants that it is preferable not to draw
attention to oneself. The act of making a complaint against the
police through whatever channels was generally expected to have
either no result at all or a negative result, "You'd only
get stopped more often". Concern that whether a complaint
was upheld or not by the Police Ombudsman, the very act of registering
a complaint would mean that the police would "aggravate you
and watch you even more if you did".
Reasons for complaining
"I'd only complain if they hit me" (Monkstown).
Most of the young people felt that the action that merited
a complaint had to be serious otherwise it would be ignored and
viewed as trivial. When this issue was pursued it was generally
felt that "serious" meant physical assault, while complaints
about other forms of police behaviour such as verbal abuse and
harassment would not be taken seriously,
"I reckon at the end of the day she probably gets loads
and loads (of complaints) and she (Police Ombudsman) probably
wouldn't take yours into account unless it was really serious."
Researcher: What would you view as serious?
"If you seen some kind of injustice you know if you saw
something like somebody being beat up."
However, there were other issues which were important to
young people including lesser forms of harassment such as verbal
abuse, being moved along, sitting outside their houses or at meeting
places and being watched, that the young people felt they could
not complain about,
"You would feel stupid complaining for such a small thing"
(on police attitude and ways of talking to young people) (Fermanagh).
"You would be laughed to because you're a kid" (Belfast).
In theory many felt that if an individual felt unfairly treated
this was enough to justify a complaint but in reality this probably
would not be the case,
"I think in theory if you believe that you have been
treated unfairly that would be a reason for you to go to the Ombudsman
but I think in reality people would feel that they would need
to be physically attacked or verbally abused—strongly verbally
abused before they would consider approaching the Ombudsman"
(Glengormley).
Reasons for not complaining
The quantitative study asked "if you had problems with
the police but chose not to complain why did you not do so?".
Table 20 documents the results of the respondents who chose not
to complain (382 respondents, 33% of the total).
Table 20
REASONS FOR NOT COMPLAINING
| Reason | Frequency
| Percentage |
| Police would not do anything | 226
| 59 |
| Incident was not serious enough | 48
| 13 |
| Could not be bothered | 40 |
10 |
| Did not know how to complain | 24
| 6 |
| Scared of police reprisals | 34
| 9 |
| Other | 10 | 3
|
| Total | 382 |
100 |
| | |
Within the focus groups there was a perception that the issues
considered to be important to young people would be seen as less
significant by the Police Ombudsman. Therefore, their importance
would be minimised by the systems set in place by the more powerful
Ombudsman, "they would be too busy to deal with "lesser
complaints." (Glengormley).
From one Belfast group there was an overriding feeling that,
"small things would be laughed at or ignored, for example
being followed around in shops" (Belfast).
1. Lack of Knowledge: For some who did not complain
the simple reason was that they did not know how to,
"I would have complained to her, but I didn't know how
to" (Glengormley).
This led some of the young people to request more information
about how and who to complain to and the complaints procedure
itself. One group commented on the South City Beat television
programme about the PSNI in South Belfast and thought a similar
programme could follow complaints,
"I thought that (South City Beat) was a really
good series . . . Maybe the Ombudsman could produce something
. . . a case where Joe Bloggs takes a complaint . . . I have never
heard the Ombudsman publicising" (Glengormley).
2. Accessibility: For some there was also an
issue of accessibility as there was no local Office in their area
for them to call in and lodge a complaint,
"If there was an Office in Derry I would go in and see
about it (complaint)".
"Their Office isn't massively accessible" (Derry
Londonderry).
As noted above one young woman who worked in the Citizen's
Advice Bureau (CAB) told her group that the Police Ombudsman's
Office "use our offices for interviews", but none of
the other group members were aware that this was the case. This
again highlights the lack of knowledge of the operations of the
Police Ombudsman's Office and of the ways that people can complain
about police behaviour.
3. Support for the Police: There were a number
of respondents who were reluctant to complain due to their overall
support of the police,
"You don't want to go against them if you are sympathetic
to the difficulties of policing."
4. Pointless: Among those who had decided not
to complain there was an overwhelming feeling that there was "no
point"
". . . there's no point in putting a complaint in . .
. nothing happens" (Larne).
It was felt that their version of events would not be believed,
". . . the courts will always believe the police anyway"
and "it's my word against the police officers" (Belfast).
One group indicated that complaining through the Police Ombudsman
would be useless as "they are bound to show favouritism to
the police". This belief in "favouritism" towards
the police led to discussions on the impartial nature of the Police
Ombudsman. As noted above many young people felt that the organisation
was just another division of the police and not a separate or
independent organisation. The inclusion of "police"
in the name underpinned this sense of connection for some,
"The name Police Ombudsman makes people think they are
something to do with the police" (Belfast).
5. Too Much Hassle: Other young people simply
said that they felt that it was not worth the hassle to make a
complaint and it was easier to accept the situation and get on
with life,
"to be honest with you I couldn't be bothered with the
hassle" (Ballymena).
The perceived hassle of making a complaint indicated that
some do not view the procedure to be "user friendly".
In addition some young people feared that they would be subjected
to further harassment or reprisals if they complained,
". . . if you make a complaint against the police . .
. they are going to watch you even more" (Belfast).
6. Nothing To Gain: One young female said that
she didn't complain because she had nothing to gain. She had witnessed
a man being beaten but didn't complain as,
"there was no likelihood of getting any compensation
for herself" (Derry Londonderry).
However, this attitude was not echoed by the rest of the
group, who felt that "the police shouldn't cross the line"
and that only by complaining could police boundaries be established.
THE PROCEDURE
OF COMPLAINING
For many participants the formal procedure of complaining
was considered to be daunting (the procedure is set out in Appendix
2). For some people the lack of knowledge only served to increase
their fear about the procedure. Within the focus groups only a
few participants had actually made a formal complaint but many
others said that they would have liked to but did not know how
or just hadn't bothered.
Those who had complained made their complaints at a variety
of locations. Some had lodged the complaint at a police station,
although some had said they had been reluctant to complain in
this way because of fear of reprisals. Others had made a complaint
direct to the Police Ombudsman's Office, at a Citizen's Advice
Bureau or through their MLA. Table 17 shows the organisations/individuals
that complainants approached to voice their complaint.
For those who had complained to the Police Ombudsman the
complaint had been mainly made through a solicitor. Some of the
young people said that their parents had taken charge of the complaint
and they themselves had little to do with the actual procedure,
"I didn't complain myself, but my mum and dad did, through
the solicitor to the Ombudsman" (Belfast).
However the majority of young people who felt that they had
cause for complaint against the police chose not to initiate a
formal process as they felt that the issue was too trivial. This
caused frustration and some young people suggested that they needed
somewhere to lodge dissatisfaction with the police service as
well as complaints. One young person suggested that the Police
Ombudsman's Office should have separate departments for different
types of complaint, a complaints section for more serious situations
that required investigation and a separate department to lodge
general dissatisfaction.
THE OUTCOME
Some of the young people who had lodged a complaint were
not happy with the outcome. The survey revealed that 15 of the
24 respondents (62%) who had contacted the Police Ombudsman's
Office were not happy with the service they had received. Table
21 highlights the reasons for their dissatisfaction. One young
male in the focus groups felt that there had been no point complaining
as nothing was done, ". . . there's no point . . . there's
nothing done". However, another individual felt that even
though the outcome was not what he had desired it was still worth
complaining as the complaints might add up and then someone would
have to listen.
Table 21
REASON FOR NOT BEING HAPPY WITH THE SERVICE FROM THE POLICE
OMBUDSMAN
| Reason | Frequency
| Percentage |
| Slow Response | 5 |
33 |
| Did not take complaint seriously | 5
| 33 |
| Did not hear anything after making complaint
| 2 | 13 |
| Did not follow up complaint | 2
| 13 |
| Process took a long time | 1
| 6 |
| Total | 15 | 100
|
| | |
One participant who had been unhappy with the Police Ombudsman's
handling of his complaint admitted that his dissatisfaction arose
from not receiving the outcome he had desired,
"Fuck all happened . . . I just got a letter and nothing
was done" (Belfast).
For many the final outcome of any complaint would be to see
the police officer against which the complaint was made be disciplined
to ensure that no one else would suffer,
"I would like to see discipline . . . something really
done about it like . . . for people in the future" (Belfast).
One young man said that all he wanted was "guarantees
that action would be taken" and to be kept informed whilst
the investigation was being carried out.
"While they carry out the investigation it would be good
if they kept in touch" (Belfast).
The lack of any information about the nature of the investigation
made this participant feel that things were being concealed.
A few of the participants said that their motive for complaining
would be financial and they would want compensation, "All
I want is compensation, to make something out of it" (Hydebank).
But others within this group disagreed and said that an apology
and a change in the way they were treated were more important.
For the young people who took part in this research there was
a desire to have their complaints and sense of dissatisfaction
towards the police recognised and for them to be listened to.
This was something that many of the young people felt never happened
and this left them feeling worthless and unimportant.
SECTION 7
SUGGESTIONS
The following suggestions are based on ideas generated within
the discussion groups with the young people.
7.1 GENERAL SUGGESTIONS
Need for Transparency: The general suggestion
made was the need for more transparency from all of the organisations.
Throughout the discussion groups, participants suggested how the
issues of engagement and transparency could be tackled within
policing organisations and these were used within other groups
as basis for discussion. Many suggestions were eagerly picked
up and encouraged debate within the groups.
Outreach: It was also suggested that the both
the police and the Police Ombudsman's Office should engage in
more outreach work to increase knowledge and understanding. It
was further recommended that this should be conducted at an inter-generational
level beginning with preschoolers to encourage debate and support
from within the family and educational systems.
7.3 Police Ombudsman's Office
Feedback: Participants who had made a formal complaint
against the police indicated that they would like to have more
feedback and updating on the progress of their complaint.
Increase Awareness: Some groups suggested that
the Office should have a public awareness campaign to increase
consumer awareness of its role and procedures. In spite of the
Office producing information leaflets and providing talks none
of the respondents had received any information. Group discussions
perceived that the most far reaching effects would come by advertising
on TV in a documentary style that would personalise the narrative
elements within the work and be followed up with key images in,
for example newspapers, on the back of buses and in college libraries.
It was also felt that more general information about how
to contact the Office should be publicised by: Youth-friendly
posters in venues used by young people such as the dole office,
church, youth centres, nightclubs, school and colleges; newspapers;
back of buses; child benefit books; road shows that told the stories
not just the process; a freephone number.
Outcome of complaints: Some individuals within
groups emphasised the incentive of compensation whilst others
were more satisfied with a personalised and full apology with
explanations and acknowledgments of their actions. However, whatever
the outcome the young people wanted to be informed and feel that
their complaint had been fairly dealt with.
Structure: It was also suggested that there should
be a separate department within the Office dedicated to young
people, for dealing with small complaints (like being followed
in the town/round shops). This would enable complaints to be registered,
even when there was a minimum/lack of evidence on the part of
the complainant.
It was also felt that the Police Ombudsman's Office would
be seen to raise its profile and demonstrate its impartiality
if it were to take a more active role in lobbying for more transparent
policing policies such as cameras inside police land rovers to
record what happens and as one interviewee commented, "we
never have evidence, if they want it they should put cameras inside
police Land Rovers to see what they do" (Hydebank).
SECTION 8
RECOMMENDATIONS
POLICE OMBUDSMAN
FOR NORTHERN
IRELAND
1. There is still clearly a need to promote greater awareness
of the organisation and its work among young people. This appears
to be particularly important for young people living outside of
Belfast. One option would be to organise a road show or out-reach
programme involving presentations in schools and youth organisations.
Many young people have some knowledge of the Police Ombudsman's
Office but that knowledge is lacking in depth and an outreach
programme should aim to build upon existing knowledge, rather
than focus on providing very basic information.
2. Information for young people on the Office should
be more attractive and appropriate to a young audience. Designing
this material will require some consultation and discussion with
young people. It might therefore be appropriate to convene an
advisory group of young people for say a six month period to discuss
in more detail how the Police Ombudsman's Office might make their
information and services more accessible to young people.
3. A number of young people commented on the South
City Beat programme and suggested a similar programme on the
Office would be of interest. The Police Ombudsman's Office could
approach one of the local TV companies and suggest the idea of
a documentary on the work of the organisation. Such a programme
might be made more relevant by exploring the complaints process
from a young person's perspective.
4. There is also a need to increase awareness of practical
matters such as where people can go to lodge complaints other
than the Police Ombudsman's Office, the police or through a solicitor.
No young person had lodged a complaint through a Citizen's Advice
Bureau for example. There should be a wider range of outlets throughout
Northern Ireland for people to go to lodge complaints and a promotion
of those which already exist. One option would be to have a Police
Ombudsman logo that could be used to advertise where to lodge
a complaint.
5. Many young people commented how the Office was Belfast
based. It would therefore be worth exploring options for the Police
Ombudsman's Office to have Offices in other areas to promote a
presence outside Belfast. These could be organised as surgery
style offices whereby a representative of the Police Ombudsman's
Office would attend different towns on a monthly basis.
6. We also noted the variability of information on the
initial complaint that is lodged. It would be useful to either
devise a standardised complaints form, or ensure widespread availability
of the current form for all those agencies and organisations that
receive complaints against police officers.
7. Finally given the large number of complaints made
by young people it would be worth considering creating a team
within Police Ombudsman's Office who specifically deal with complaints
by young people and produce information especially for them. This
would enable specialist knowledge to be developed and information
to be gained on problems experienced by young people and best
methods of responding to them.
| 
