Proposals to allow chief officers to dismiss police officers are disgraceful and ignore the principles of natural justice, Greater Manchester Police Federation has said.
Chair Mike Peake was responding to proposed reforms to regulations governing police conduct and dismissal.
Those reforms have been proposed by Sadiq Khan, Mayor of London, and Harriet Harman KC, MP for Camberwell and Peckham, who say the current system is “not fit for purpose”.
They have written to Home Secretary Suella Braverman, inviting her to bring their proposals to Parliament.
Among the changes they suggested are to automatically dismiss a serving officer who is convicted of a serious criminal offence, or who fails vetting and Automatically suspend an officer charged with a serious criminal offence as well as giving Chief Constables the power to reopen misconduct investigations
But Mike Peake has said all police officers deserve to be considered innocent until they are found guilty.
He added: “The recent political push to give police chiefs uncontrolled powers to dismiss officers without regard to due legal process is frankly disgraceful. It seems that the personal sacrifice that police officers make on a daily basis when keeping our communities safe is easily forgotten by those trying to score political points.
“The likes of Sadiq Khan, Mayor of London, and Rt Hon Harriet Harman KC seem to think that they are playing a board game here, but they are not; they are playing with officers livelihoods and careers. It would be wholly unfair for anyone to be able to roll the dice and advance to the final space on the board without first navigating their way around the board, whilst observing the rules in play.
“Modern day policing is extremely challenging and demanding, and the vast majority of police officers do an amazing job.
“They have joined the service to make a difference for the communities they serve, but sometimes police officers get things wrong. That shouldn’t mean that everyone should be booted out of policing; if an officer gets something wrong when trying to do the right thing, then as a minimum they should expect the support of their police chiefs.
“For the small number of officers who deserve to be dismissed from the police service, there is already a fit-for-purpose fast-track style process in place. When sufficient evidence exists to establish Gross Misconduct, and when it is in the public interest for an officer to cease to be a member of a police force, police chiefs can make use of the accelerated misconduct hearing process to consider a timely dismissal for the officer concerned.
“We cannot and should not ignore the principles of natural justice. All police officers have the right to a fair hearing, and should be considered innocent until proven guilty.”
Other proposed reforms include a so-called ‘Duty of Candour’, which would require an officer to proactively report any wrongdoing (by themselves or others), and a ‘Duty to Handover’ to obtain relevant information from an officer’s personal phone during a misconduct investigation
And Mr Khan and Ms Harman have also called for pension forfeiture rules to be changed so a criminal offence does not have to be committed ‘in connection’ with an officer’s service in order for them to lose their pension.
The Police Federation of England and Wales also criticised what it called “sweeping and uncontrolled powers” set out in the proposals.
A PFEW spokesperson said: “Policing in our country is in crisis and police officers desperately need cross-party support. The incredibly hard-working police work force need to set right their pay, working conditions and employment rights.
“Baroness Casey’s recent review of the Metropolitan Police Service highlights a possible way forward to deliver the changes needed to restore public confidence and deliver an improved service.
“Cultural reform and service-wide change cannot be undertaken by handing out sweeping, uncontrolled powers to police chiefs to dismiss officers without following due legal process. Systemic changes in police recruitment, vetting, training, standards, and leadership are needed, but any change must be fair, considered and backed by proper evidence and not conjecture.”
