Supplementary memorandum submitted by
the Police Service of Northern Ireland
RESPONSE TO QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMITTEE
Thank you for your letter of 24 August 2004. The
Committee asked for the Police Service of Northern Ireland's response
to a number of issues, and these are set out herewith.
What in your view is the significance of the difference
in the rates of decline of complaints and allegations?
While we welcome the decline in both the numbers
of complaints and allegation, the difference in the rates of decline
is of some concern. The Police Ombudsman owns this information,
and we would be interested in the results of any analysis her
office were to carry out in this regard.
Experience shows that the volume of both complaints
and allegations is, to a considerable degree, dependent on the
level of street disorder and the prevailing political atmosphere,
and not only a reflection on the quality of the policing service.
What weight is given to allegations and what to
complaints in taking a view of the changes in the quality of policing
which may be reflected in these figures?
The PSNI's trending and tracking policy takes cognisance
of the number of complaints against any individual officer. Three
or more complaints in a rolling 12-month period automatically
highlights the officer to his or her management. The number of
allegations may thereafter be considered when the officer has
been so highlighted. Consequently, more weight is attached to
complaints than allegations.
Have you found any confusion arising from statistics
being kept in the form of both complaints and allegations?
No: it is common practice in the policing environment
to draw such distinctions.
Does the PSNI believe that the Ombudsman should
be given a duty to investigate complaints against retired police
officers?
Allegations of criminal conduct made against retired
police officers are investigated by the police service and the
facts placed before the Director of Public Prosecutions (Public
Prosecution Service). Section 56(3) Police (Northern Ireland)
Act 1998 gives the Ombudsman's officers the powers of a constable,
and they are therefore empowered to investigate criminal allegations
against retired members, should they choose to do so. However,
their powers to report someone to the DPP(PPS) for prosecution
are, by virtue Section 58(2) of Act, restricted to serving members
only. The PSNI would be prepared to develop a protocol for forwarding
reports to the prosecuting authority on the Ombudsman's behalf
without the requirement for further legislative change.
Retirement from the police service does, of course,
give protection from misconduct proceedings, as the legislation
no longer applies to such individuals. The PSNI recognises that
misconduct proceedings against retired officers may bring satisfaction
to the complainant, however, as the Conduct Regulations are intended
to maintain discipline in a uniformed organisation, it appears
to be contrary to iriatural justice to subject an individual to
such rules when he or she is no longer a member.
Furthermore, the panel that normally sits for misconduct
hearings would neither have jurisdiction over a retired member
nor be able to impose any sanctions. Even if an entirely new judicial
body with meaningful sanctions were to be constituted, any action
taken would be unlikely to succeed given the robust argument under
Human Rights legislation that retired members' legal representatives
would be likely to make. The position in respect of members who
have resigned, been required to resign, or been dismissed is identical
to that of those who have retired.
Does the PSNI believe that the Ombudsman should
be given a duiy to investigate complaints against member of the
British Army operating in aid of the civil power?
Recommendation 58 of the Patten report, entitled
"Army Support—Security Demands" states: "The
role of the army should continue to be reduced, as quickly as
the security situation will allow, so that the police can patrol
all parts of Northern Ireland without military support."
The PSNI remains hopeful that the security situation
will develop to allow the withdrawal of military personnel from
the streets. There is a danger that the wrong message could be
sent by extending the Ombudsman's duty to investigate the British
Army at this time.
There have been occasions when the British Army has
been present in riot situations that were subsequently investigated
by the Ombudsman. Where relevant, she has had the freedom to make
recommendations about military equipment and procedures, and these
have been forwarded to the Army by the PSNI. The fact that, technically,
she has no power to comment on the Army has not proved to be a
barrier in such circumstances. There is already an independent
oversight of the army, in the form of the Independent Assessor
for Complaints Against the Military, Mr Jim McDonald. The Committee
may wish to seek his views before reaching any conclusion on this
issue.
Can you please provide the Committee with a brief
summary on the facilities and training courses; information on
the "benchmarking" undertaken in arriving at the physical,
administrative and curricular structures chosen for the College;
and whether the Police Ombudsman was involved in the plans for
the College, and if so, what that involvement was?
The new Police College of Northern Ireland will be
constructed around a simulated learning environment supported
by state-of-the-art learning and academic facilities. Practical
work-based learning will support an action-centred activity based
approach to skills development. The curricular activities are
constructed through the expertise of a broad range of Learning
Advisory Council members from all areas of the community.
The "benchmarking" was undertaken by way
of an international observation team, which examined many of the
world-class facilities in Australia, the United States of America,
Canada and Great Britain. They then worked with the college project
team to develop overall plans for the new college.
The Ombudsman's office is a standing member of the
Police College Learning Advisory Team and, additionally, regularly
meets with Police College staff and has input to many of it courses.
The Chairman asked for a comprehensive note from
the PSNI on proposed changes to the Police Ombudsman's mediation
powers.
Current arrangements allow for the mediation of complaints
following a full investigation, and this remains an initiative
we welcome: any aid to obtaining complainant satisfaction will
attract the support of the PSNI; and it should increase public
confidence in the process.
Current proposals move mediation to the beginning
of the process, where it will be used as an alternative to informal
resolution (IR). PSNI understands that, in suitable cases, complainants
will be given the choice of mediation by the Ombudsman or IR by
Police.
The decision as to whether a matter is suitable for
IR rests with the Ombudsman. According to the Ombudsman's figures,
about 30% of all recorded complaints are judged suitable for IR,
and this is successfully undertaken in around 70% of such cases.
With complainants being asked for their preference,
the potential exisis for only those cases that have very little
prospect of resolution being referred to the police. Adverse contrasts
could then be drawn between the success of mediation arid the
failure of resolution; and the police service will have lost an
effective management tool.
Research into the IR indicates there to be a higher
level of satisfaction among complainants using this process than
those involved in a full investigation: they have the opportunity
to have their say, the process is speedier, and they are actively
involvement in the settlement. (Maguire and Corbett 1991 as reported
in A Force For Change? The prospects of applying Restorative
Justice to Citizen Complaints against the Police in England and
Wales; The Centre for Criminal Justice Studies 2002).
"A Force For Change?" also emphasises the
importance of IR as a management tool; and The Hayes Report
(1997) also described IR in this context. Hayes suggested
that there should be appropriately trained, designated IR officers
in stations. Nowhere in the report is there a sense that IR should
be replaced by the Ombudsman.
Under the new arrangements for England and Wales,
the IR process has been renamed "local resolution" to
indicate that it is a serious procedure. Although the Home Office
has established the Independent Police Complaints Commission,
"Local resolution" remains a police and not an IPCC
responsibility.
Informal Resolution is about the management of people,
of expectations, and of resources. Sector inspectors are familiar
with local issues, police resources and their own staff. Our policy
on trending and tracking makes it even more important that local
managers are involved in resolving complaints.
Complaints suitable for IR must not be of a serious
nature or justify criminal proceedings. As the proposals currently
stand, an officer may be the subject of IR, followed by mediation,
followed by a full investigation. This contrasts with the arrangements
in England and Wales, where it is explained to the complainant
that consent to IR precludes a full investigation; and we would
welcome similar arrangements here.
An officer who has been through an IR process that
has failed may be reluctant to consent to mediation, yet he or
she will be disadvantaged if that consent is not forthcoming,
as the Ombudsman will move to a full investigation. Although the
conduct complained of must not be of a serious nature or justify
criminal proceedings, officers could be subjected to three separate
procedures. At a meeting with the Ombudsman on 7 July 2004 assurances
were given that it would not normally be the intention to use
all three methods of disposal, but the proposed legislalion would
allow for that, and this is a cause for concern.
28 September 2004
| 
