An appropriate authority within the police organisation will have the power to use initial evidence to determine if a complaint is worthy of a full investigation before handing it to the independent review panel.
The appropriate authority will be senior police officers, but if complaints against them are made the power lies with the political members of Home Affairs.
But the independent panel – the Police Complaints Commission – must agree with this assessment.
It will have the power to order an investigation even if police or Home say one isn’t warranted.
Complaint logjam
Home Affairs said the previous system was being undermined by a “flooding” of repeat complaints which slowed down the investigation of legitimate concerns.
It’s hoped the changes being gradually rolled out by the Committee will increase public confidence in law enforcement and the complaints process, which has come under fire recently due to high-profile claims against officers going through the courts.
Home says the new system will also better protect police officers and police morale generally, and use of the new complaint filter is noted as being common practice across all other jurisdictions in the British Isles.
Police officers are considered public officials and must use private legal services when they are sued, as individuals. However, these have been funded by the taxpayer in recent cases to the tune of hundreds of thousands of pounds.
Home has now received legal advice on reform and says it will “bring an urgent policy letter” soon to change how liability in these cases is handled.
Pictured: Deputy Rob Prow.
Deputy Rob Prow, Home Affairs President, had previously labelled the police complaints process “not fit for purpose”, with the independent Police Complaints Commission calling for more powers to investigate.
Home have now embarked on a review of the system which will include how complaints and conduct are dealt with, but also standards in service delivery.
But Deputy Prow said “recent attempts to abuse the system” have highlighted gaps in the 13-year-old legislation.
“Today’s specific change, however, was an issue we could address expediently… it would have been remiss of us not to make this important change as quickly as we could,” he said yesterday. “The filter will ensure the process is proportionate, providing for an informed assessment of alleged conduct that enables complaints without foundation to be dealt with effectively at an early procedural stage.
“Further, a proportionate approach may assist in distinguishing matters of gross misconduct, which may draw in to question an officer’s continued suitability to perform their role, from less serious complaints. As we have previously stated, the Committee has also identified an urgent need to bring in vicarious liability for our police officers. We will be bringing an urgent policy letter to the States on this matter in the very near future.
“I’d like to reassure the public that this work is about improving the police complaints process. It is of course important that the process is fair to officers, but it is vital that members of our community have the ability to raise legitimate grievances with the police when they may arise. For those legitimate complaints to get lost among complaints which are repetitious, or otherwise an abuse of process is simply not right and an unnecessary drain on our precious resources.”