Memorandum submitted by the Independent
Police Complaints Commission
SUMMARY
The IPCC's primary responsibility is to secure
and maintain public confidence in the handling of complaints by
the public against the police and matters involving police conduct.
Its functions include the investigation of incidents involving
death or serious injury during or following contact with the police.
As the police are responsible for the system of firearms licensing,
the IPCC has a role in cases of death or serious injury caused
by use of licensed firearms.
Following a series of cases involving licensed
firearms, the IPCC identified a number of concerns about the system
for licensing firearms, in particular in relation to medical history,
and, in consultation with other responsible bodies, put forward
proposals to amend the Home Office's guidance on firearms licensing.
This submission draws the attention of the Committee to these
proposals and the work done so far to progress them. The IPCC
hopes the inquiry by the Committee into the need for changes in
the laws governing firearms licensing, and in particular the focus
on information-sharing between medics and the police, will give
impetus to the necessary action.
A fuller description of the IPCC's role is set
out at the end of this submission.
FIREARMS LICENSING
1. A series of investigations involving
licensed firearms prompted the IPCC in 2007 to consider what lessons
could be learnt in relation to the role of the police. Several
of the incidents investigated resulted in deaths, including in
one case the shooting of a police officer. The IPCC conducted
an analysis of the cases in question, and subsequent cases as
they occurred, in order to pinpoint any common factors. The main
issues identified are outlined below.
2. The extent to which a criminal record
is, or can be, taken into account.
In some instances certificates were granted
(or not revoked) despite a record of offences that might be considered
relevant, including breach of bail conditions relating to threats
to kill and offensive weapons charges, criminal damage and a series
of convictions for alcohol-related offences.
3. The extent to which intelligence other
than convictions is, or can be, taken into account.
Some cases involved firearms licensees who were
the subject of a series of allegations that did not proceed to
a conviction. A certificate of a licensee was renewed even though
he had been bound over as a result of an allegation of domestic
violence and was at the time suspected of burglary of the victim
(he later murdered her). A licensee was arrested for a violent
outbreak at work and, in a later incident, for affray and assault
and was subsequently reported for a race hate incident; none of
these was treated either singularly or cumulatively as grounds
to revoke the license and he subsequently shot at police officers
called to a domestic incident involving him. In both these cases,
the licensees also had criminal convictions.
It was noticeable from the analysis of the cases
how many involved domestic incidents, either as the trigger for
misuse of the licensed firearm or in the history of the licensee.
Medical history
4. Firearms certificates were granted to
those with a history of depression and alcohol-related problems
because they did not disclose them on application. (There have
to be doubts about the applicant's medical history before the
police can approach his/her GP.) In one case investigated by the
IPCC the licensee was shot dead by police after an incident in
which he fired shots from his property with his shotgun. Where
an applicant in one instance did declare he suffered from depression,
the police did not pursue enquiries with his GP because the GP
asked for advance payment of a fee the force considered too high.
The IPCC's concern about gaps in the system
for obtaining relevant medical information was reflected at the
inquest into the death of Mr Christopher Foster, who used a licensed
firearm to kill first his wife and daughter and then himself in
August 2008. The coroner recommended improving the system for
relevant medical information becoming available post-grant or
on renewal.
PROPOSALS
5. The IPCC worked with representatives
of the Home Office, ACPO, the Police Federation and NPIA to reach
a shared view as to how to address the issues arising. In some
instances the problems arose from failures of communication between
the firearms licensing department and the rest of the force. It
is hoped that advances in linking police computer systems will
help address this aspect. However, in other cases it appeared
to be the wording of Firearms Law—Guidance to the Police
2002 (the Guidance), the Home Office guidance to the police on
firearms licensing that explained the stance taken by the police.
6. The IPCC therefore developed proposals
to amend and strengthen the Guidance for presentation to the ACPO
Firearms and Explosives Licensing Working Group (FELWG), the ACPO
body that makes recommendations to the Home Office for changes
in the Guidance. These proposals are outlined below.
Medical information
7. The Guidance currently provides that
GPs should not be approached as a matter of routine and the authority
to do so should only be used where there are genuine doubts or
concerns about the applicant's medical history that might be relevant
to suitability to possess firearms, either because of information
on the form or arising from other information available to the
police.
8. Proposals:
— The force should be required to approach
the applicant's doctor in each case to obtain confirmation that
the medical information provided in the application form was correct.
This proposal was designed to address failure by an applicant
to disclose medical problems.
— The applicant, rather than the police,
should be required to meet the cost of any fee charged by the
GP.
Convictions
9. The Guidance provides for forces to consider
previous convictions or cautions, in particular those involving
violence, when assessing fitness to be entrusted with a firearm.
However, it makes no mention of bind overs or the cumulative relevance
of a series of offences.
10. Proposals:
— Bind overs should be included as a relevant
factor and greater emphasis be given to convictions for domestic
violence.
— A series of convictions, even if one
was not on its own enough to justify refusal or revocation, should
normally be treated as sufficient evidence of unfitness unless
well in the past.
Allegations/Intelligence
11. The Guidance provides that, when assessing
fitness to be entrusted with a firearm, forces should also consider:
— evidence of aggressive or anti-social
behaviour, which may include domestic disputes;
— evidence of disturbing and unusual behaviour
which suggests firearms may be misused; and
— evidence of alcohol or drug abuse which
suggests possible impairment of judgement and loss of self control.
It recognises that the test of "beyond
reasonable doubt" applicable to crimes is too high for consideration
of applications for a firearms license, but is silent on the test
to be applied.
12. Proposal:
— The test to be applied should be either
"balance of probabilities" or "significant risk
that the allegation/intelligence is true" and the Guidance
should be explicit that intelligence which has not resulted in
a conviction may still be evidence of unfitness, especially if
a number of allegations has been received from different people.
False information
13. Proposal:
— The Guidance should make knowingly or
recklessly making a false statement on the application form, especially
in relation to convictions or medical conditions, of particular
relevance to unfitness.
CURRENT POSITION
14. FELWG was generally in support of the
proposals made and, as the relevant ACPO body, assumed the lead
on negotiating changes to the Guidance. We understand the current
position to be as follows.
15. FELWG approached the BMA for views on
the medical concerns. In September 2009 ACPO and the BMA were
able to reach agreement in principle for a system under which
forces would notify an applicant's GP of an application (initial
or renewal) for a firearms or shotgun certificate, with a marker
placed on the patient's record accordingly, thus enabling the
GP to raise any medical concerns on application or subsequently.
16. This and the other proposals for changes
to the Guidance were considered by the Practitioners Group, comprising
representatives from the Home Office, British Shooting and Sports
Council, and the police. We understand they were acceptable in
principle but concerns were raised regarding the appropriate level
of confidentiality in relation to disclosure of medical information
by GPs. Discussion has been under way since then on how to address
this aspect. ACPO is also in discussion with the Information Commissioner's
Office about issues of proportionality and the purposes for which
the NHS is authorised to hold data.
17. We understand amendment of the Guidance
to address the other proposals is awaiting resolution of the medical
issues.
THE INDEPENDENT
POLICE COMPLAINTS
COMMISSION
18. The Independent Police Complaints Commission,
which operates in England and Wales only, became operational in
April 2004, succeeding the Police Complaints Authority. The IPCC
was created by the Police Reform Act 2002 as a Non-Departmental
Public Body (NDPB) with a remit in respect of complaints and allegations
of misconduct against police in England and Wales.
19. More recently this remit has been extended
to include the investigation of serious allegations against officers
of the Serious Organised Crime Agency (SOCA), HM Revenue and Customs
and the UK Border Agency.
20. The IPCC is overseen by a Board of Commissioners
appointed by the Home Secretary. By law, Commissioners must never
have worked for the police service in any capacity. They are the
public, independent face of the IPCC.
21. The IPCC's powers include:
— investigative powers: the IPCC may independently
investigate cases, oversee police investigations of cases, or
leave cases to be locally investigated by the police without oversight;
— an appeal function: complainants who
are unhappy with how the police dealt with their complaint may
appeal to the IPCC;
— the power to direct a force to convene
a disciplinary tribunal and, in exceptional cases, to direct that
the tribunal be held in public; and
— the power to recommend, in the light
of its experience, changes to police policy and practice and the
arrangements for handling police complaints and conduct matters.
26 August 2010
| 
