DOCSLIB.ORG

Police Complaints and Discipline

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Police Complaints and Discipline BRIEFING PAPER Number 2056, 4 September 2020 Police complaints and By Jennifer Brown discipline Contents: 1. Fundamentals 2. Reforms 2014-2020 3. Complaints 4. Discipline www.parliament.uk/commons-library | intranet.parliament.uk/commons-library | [email protected] | @commonslibrary 2 Police complaints and discipline Contents Summary 3 1. Fundamentals 6 1.1 Legislation 6 1.2 Key definitions 6 1.3 Key actors 8 1.4 Outcomes 10 2. Reforms 2014-2020 13 2.1 The reforms process 13 2.2 Why the reforms? 14 2.3 What has changed? 17 2.4 What has not changed? 21 3. Complaints 24 3.1 The basics 24 3.2 Recording 25 3.3 Referral 26 3.4 Handling 27 3.5 Review 29 4. Discipline 31 4.1 The basics 31 4.2 Standards of professional behaviour 31 4.3 Misconduct and gross misconduct 33 4.4 Whistleblowing 34 4.5 Conduct investigations 34 4.6 Disciplinary proceedings 36 IMG_2525 by Andy McDonnell. Licensed under CC BY 2.0 / image cropped 3 Commons Library Briefing, 4 September 2020 Summary The information in this research briefing relates to England and Wales only The police complaints and discipline systems are key to police accountability. They facilitate the public and those within policing to raise concerns about the management of police forces and the behaviour of individual officers. The systems are designed to provide a fair and effective way for these concerns to be addressed. Public confidence in the systems is vital to securing overall confidence in the police. The systems have long been the subject of political scrutiny. They are notoriously complicated despite repeated attempts to simplify them with reform. The independence of the systems (or perceived lack thereof) has also been the subject of repeated criticism. Recent reforms Between 2014 and 2020 Coalition and Conservative Governments undertook the latest major reforms of the systems. The implementation of these reforms took some time and the reformed systems became fully operational in February 2020.1 The reforms were wide-ranging but perhaps the most significant changes are: • The transformation of the previous Independent Police Complaints Commission into the new Independent Office for Police Conduct. The IOPC has a new governance structure. It also has new powers to initiate police complaints and direct certain police investigations into the conduct of police personnel. • The introduction of Police and Crime Commissioners (PCCs) into the complaints system. The offices of directly elected Police and Crime Commissioners (and the Deputy Mayor in London and Manchester) are now responsible for reviewing the complaint handling of forces when certain complainants are unhappy. They can also choose to further extend their responsibilities for police complaints. However, only three PCCs have so far chosen to play a greater role in handling complaints against their local force. • The simplification of the complaints system. Many complex aspects of the old system have been repealed or replaced. The overall effect of these reforms is to reduce the number of pinch points in the system where complaint handling could get held up. • Introducing some independence into the police discipline system. Misconduct hearings (the most serious police discipline procedure) are now typically held in public. They are now chaired by independent legally qualified persons rather than senior police officers. 1 Note: Some reforms relating to police whistleblowing are not yet in force. 4 Police complaints and discipline It will take time for the reforms to bed in. It will therefore be some time before the overall impact of these changes can be accurately assessed. Police complaints: the basics There are three key actors in the police complaints system: • The Independent Office of Police Conduct (IOPC) is the body that oversees the system and conducts independent investigations into the most serious police complaint and conduct matters. • Police force Professional Standards Departments (PSDs) include specialist teams responsible for handling most complaint matters for their force. • Police and Crime Commissioners (or in Manchester and London the Deputy Mayor for Policing and Crime) are responsible for monitoring their forces complaint handling. They also conduct complaint reviews in some cases and can choose to extend their responsibilities further. The police complaints process has four stages: 1 Recording: A decision to record a complaint is made. Recorded complaints must be handled in line with statutory rules set out in Schedule 3 of the Police Reform Act 2002 (as amended). 2 Referral: A decision to refer a recorded complaint to the Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC) is made. The IOPC decide if referred complaints should be investigated and if so how. 3 Handling: A decision as to whether and how recorded complaints should be investigated is made. An outcome is either decided without a formal investigation or an investigation takes place which informs an outcome. 4 Review: Most individuals with recorded complaints can ask for their complaint to be reviewed if they are unhappy with the outcome decided at the end of handling stage. Reviews are undertaken by the relevant PCC/ Deputy Mayor or the IOPC depending on the nature of the complaint. A review can result in changes to the complaint outcome or a decision to send a complaint back to the referral or handling stage. Decisions at every stage must be “reasonable and proportionate”.2 What is reasonable and proportionate will depend on the specifics of the complaint. Those handling complaints should consider several factors including; the seriousness of the allegation, the potential for learning, how resource intensive taking the complaint forward will be alongside their overarching responsibilities to scrutinise the police and hold them accountable.3 Police complaint decisions should be fair, effective, impartial and evidence based.4 2 IOPC, Statutory guidance on the police complaints system, February 2020, para 3.2 & 3.3 3 IOPC, Statutory guidance on the police complaints system, February 2020, para 3.5 & para 3.12 4 Ibid, para 3.18 5 Commons Library Briefing, 4 September 2020 Police discipline: the basics The police disciplinary system consists of internal processes within police forces. It is structured by statutory rules set out in the Police Act 1996 (as amended) and secondary legislation made under it. Unlike the complaints system (which is overseen by the IOPC) there is no single independent body that provides oversight of the discipline system, though PCCs should hold chief constables accountable for their handling of disciplinary issues. Not all poor policing behaviour engages the discipline system. Other processes, either a reflective practice review process or an unsatisfactory performance procedure, are initiated when poor behaviour is identified that does not warrant disciplinary action. • A reflective practice review process is a formal police process. It is initiated when police conduct has fallen short of what is expected of those who work in policing but is not serious enough to warrant disciplinary action.5 • Unsatisfactory performance procedure is a police HR process. It is initiated when members of police personnel are unable to perform their duties to a satisfactory level.6 Disciplinary proceedings are initiated when there is a credible allegation of a breach of the policing standards of professional behaviour that is serious enough to warrant disciplinary action.7 Conduct that warrants disciplinary action is that which ‘damages public confidence in policing’.8 It is behaviour that learning from alone would not be a sufficient response “given the gravity or seriousness of the matter”.9 Officers whose behaviour is found to amount to misconduct or gross misconduct at a disciplinary proceeding are sanctioned. Depending on the circumstances they may be issued a formal warning, have their rank reduced or be dismissed from the police service. Officers dismissed are barred from working in the police. Police HR, conduct and discipline procedures are designed to “encourage a culture of learning and development” within the police. All forces should have procedures in place to share learnings from individual cases.10 5 IOPC, Statutory guidance on the police complaints system, February 2020, para 4.44 and 4.45 6 Home Office, Conduct, Efficiency and Effectiveness: Statutory Guidance on Professional Standards, Performance and Integrity in Policing, February 2020, para 4.59 7 r2, The Police (Conduct) Regulations 2020 8 Home Office, Conduct, Efficiency and Effectiveness: Statutory Guidance on Professional Standards, Performance and Integrity in Policing, para 4.34 9 Ibid, para 4.36 10 Home Office, Conduct, Efficiency and Effectiveness: Statutory Guidance on Professional Standards, Performance and Integrity in Policing, February 2020, para 6.43 6 Police complaints and discipline 1. Fundamentals The police complaints and discipline systems are key to police accountability. They facilitate the public and those within policing to raise concerns about the management of police forces and the behaviour of individual officers. The systems are designed to provide a fair and effective way for these concerns to be addressed. Public confidence in these systems is therefore important to securing overall confidence in the police.11 Looking for information to help with constituency casework? The Library has published a short guide to police complaints which helps MPs and their staff handle casework involving dissatisfaction with the police. 1.1 Legislation The primary piece of legislation that regulates the police complaints system is the Police Reform Act 2002 (the 2002 Act). The Police Act 1996 Part IV, Chapter II and Part 4A (the 1996 Act) is the primary piece of legislation that regulates the police discipline system.12 Part 2 of the Policing and Crime Act 2017 significantly amended the 2002 Act and made changes to the relevant provisions of the 1996 Act. Secondary legislation provides detailed provisions for both systems. The Police (Complaints and Misconduct) Regulations 2020 further regulates the complaints system and The Police (Conduct) Regulations 2020 further regulates the discipline system.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Court of Queen's Bench of Alberta
    Court of Queen’s Bench of Alberta Citation: AVI v MHVB, 2020 ABQB 790 Date:20201216 Docket: FL03 55142 Registry: Edmonton Between: AVI Applicant and MHVB Respondent and Jacqueline Robinson, a.k.a. Jacquie Phoenix Third Party and Unauthorized Alleged Representative _______________________________________________________ Memorandum of Decision of the Honourable Mr. Justice Robert A. Graesser _______________________________________________________ I. Introduction [1] This is a follow-up to my decision of August 26, 2020 in AVI v MHVB, 2020 ABQB 489 [AVI #1]. That decision centred on an intermeddler to a child custody dispute. The third party, whose actual name is Jacqueline Robinson, instead self-identified as “Jacquie Phoenix, Sovereign Woman Living on the Land, Legal Beneficiary / Soul Administrator To the Trust of Page: 2 the Legal Fiction Known as Jacqueline Robinson”. I will in this decision refer to Ms. Robinson by her actual name, “Jacqueline Robinson”, rather than the legally meaningless “Strawman” legal persona she has adopted. [2] As discussed in AVI #1, Ms. Robinson is a pseudolaw promoter, or “guru”. Pseudolaw is a collection of spurious legally incorrect ideas that superficially sound like law, and purport to be real law. In Meads v Meads, 2012 ABQB 571 [“Meads”], ACJ Rooke grouped these concepts together under the term “Organized Pseudolegal Commercial Arguments”, or “OPCA”. In layman’s terms, pseudolaw is pure nonsense. [3] Gurus are a particularly obnoxious component of the pseudolaw phenomenon. They operate as “Typhoid Marys” who spread the pseudolaw “disease of ideas” into new populations: Donald J Netolitzky, “The History of the Organized Pseudolaw Commercial Argument Phenomenon in Canada” (2016) 53:3 Alta LR 609 at 611.
    [Show full text]
  • This Electronic Thesis Or Dissertation Has Been Downloaded from Explore Bristol Research
    This electronic thesis or dissertation has been downloaded from Explore Bristol Research, http://research-information.bristol.ac.uk Author: Torrible, Clare Title: How do civil actions against the police and police complaints interact and what does this interaction reveal about police legitimacy? General rights Access to the thesis is subject to the Creative Commons Attribution - NonCommercial-No Derivatives 4.0 International Public License. A copy of this may be found at https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/legalcode This license sets out your rights and the restrictions that apply to your access to the thesis so it is important you read this before proceeding. Take down policy Some pages of this thesis may have been removed for copyright restrictions prior to having it been deposited in Explore Bristol Research. However, if you have discovered material within the thesis that you consider to be unlawful e.g. breaches of copyright (either yours or that of a third party) or any other law, including but not limited to those relating to patent, trademark, confidentiality, data protection, obscenity, defamation, libel, then please contact [email protected] and include the following information in your message: •Your contact details •Bibliographic details for the item, including a URL •An outline nature of the complaint Your claim will be investigated and, where appropriate, the item in question will be removed from public view as soon as possible. How do civil actions against the police and police complaints interact and what does this interaction reveal about police legitimacy? Clare Torrible A dissertation submitted to the University of Bristol in accordance with the requirements for award of the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Faculty of Social Sciences and law.
    [Show full text]
  • Public Law and Civil Liberties ISBN 978-1-137-54503-9.Indd
    Copyrighted material – 9781137545039 Contents Preface . v Magna Carta (1215) . 1 The Bill of Rights (1688) . 2 The Act of Settlement (1700) . 5 Union with Scotland Act 1706 . 6 Official Secrets Act 1911 . 7 Parliament Acts 1911 and 1949 . 8 Official Secrets Act 1920 . 10 The Statute of Westminster 1931 . 11 Public Order Act 1936 . 12 Statutory Instruments Act 1946 . 13 Crown Proceedings Act 1947 . 14 Life Peerages Act 1958 . 16 Obscene Publications Act 1959 . 17 Parliamentary Commissioner Act 1967 . 19 European Communities Act 1972 . 24 Local Government Act 1972 . 26 Local Government Act 1974 . 30 House of Commons Disqualification Act 1975 . 36 Ministerial and Other Salaries Act 1975 . 38 Highways Act 1980 . 39 Senior Courts Act 1981 . 39 Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 . 45 Public Order Act 1986 . 82 Official Secrets Act 1989 . 90 Security Service Act 1989 . 96 Intelligence Services Act 1994 . 97 Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 . 100 Police Act 1996 . 104 Police Act 1997 . 106 Human Rights Act 1998 . 110 Scotland Act 1998 . 116 Northern Ireland Act 1998 . 121 House of Lords Act 1999 . 126 Freedom of Information Act 2000 . 126 Terrorism Act 2000 . 141 Criminal Justice and Police Act 2001 . 152 Anti-terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001 . 158 Police Reform Act 2002 . 159 Constitutional Reform Act 2005 . 179 Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005 . 187 Equality Act 2006 . 193 Terrorism Act 2006 . 196 Government of Wales Act 2006 . 204 Serious Crime Act 2007 . 209 UK Borders Act 2007 . 212 Parliamentary Standards Act 2009 . 213 Constitutional Reform and Governance Act 2010 . 218 European Union Act 2011 .
    [Show full text]
  • The Criminal Justice Bill 2 DECEMBER 2002 Bill 8 of 2002-03
    RESEARCH PAPER 02/72 The Criminal Justice Bill 2 DECEMBER 2002 Bill 8 of 2002-03 This paper is concerned with the Criminal Justice Bill, which is due to be considered on second reading on Wednesday 4 December. The Bill is to introduce major reforms to the criminal justice system designed to rebalance it in favour of victims, witnesses and communities. Most of the reforms are based on proposals made in two major reviews commissioned by the Government, of the legal framework of sentencing, and of the criminal courts. This paper provides a general background to the Bill and considers the provisions of the Bill relating to police powers, drug testing requirements, bail and conditional cautions. Other research papers in this series consider the provisions relating to sentencing, double jeopardy, prosecution appeals, disclosure, evidence, mode of trial and juries. Arabella Thorp and Sally Broadbridge HOME AFFAIRS SECTION HOUSE OF COMMONS LIBRARY Recent Library Research Papers include: 02/60 Unemployment by Constituency, October 2002 13.11.02 02/61 The Health (Wales) Bill [Bill 1 of 2002-03] 20.11.02 02/62 The Regional Assemblies (Preparations) Bill 21.11.02 02/63 Communications Data: Access and Retention 21.11.02 02/64 Iraq and UN Security Council Resolution 1441 21.11.02 02/65 Agriculture, Modulation and Environmental Policy 21.11.02 02/66 The Community Care (Delayed Discharges etc) Bill 22.11.02 02/67 Telecommunications and the Communications Bill [Bill 6 of 2002-03] 26.11.02 02/68 Media Ownership and the Communications Bill [Bill 6 of 2002-03]
    [Show full text]
  • Part 2 and Schedule 3 to the Police Reform Act 2002
    POLICING AND CRIME BILL: KEELING SCHEDULES This document shows provisions in Part 2 of the Police Reform Act 2002 (Complaints and Misconduct) as they would be amended by the Bill. It is intended to assist the consideration of these provisions in the Bill and should not be taken a definitive statement of the law as it would have effect on the enactment of the Bill. Deletions are shown struck through and additions in italics. Provision in the Police Reform Act 2002 Page Section 9 2 Section 10 4 Section 11 7 Section 12 10 Section 15 13 Section 16 16 Section 18 18 Section 20 20 Section 21 22 Section 23 26 Section 29 29 Schedule 2 33 Schedule 3 44 1 SECTION 9 OF THE POLICE REFORM ACT 2002 Section 9: The Independent Police Complaints Commission The Office for Police Conduct (1) There shall be a body corporate to be known as the Independent Police Complaints Commission (in this Part referred to as “the Commission”). (1) The body corporate previously known as the Independent Police Complaints Commission— (a) is to continue to exist, and (b) is to be known instead as the Office for Police Conduct. (2) The Commission shall consist of— (a) a chairman appointed by Her Majesty; and (b) not less than five other members appointed by the Secretary of State. (2) The Office is to consist of— (a) a Director General appointed by Her Majesty, and (b) at least six other members. (2A) The other members must consist of— (a) persons appointed as non-executive members (see paragraph 1A of Schedule 2), and (b) persons appointed as employee members (see paragraph 1B of that Schedule), but the powers of appointment under those paragraphs must be exercised so as to secure that a majority of members of the Office (including the Director General) are non-executive members.
    [Show full text]
  • Police Reform
    House of Commons Home Affairs Committee Police Reform Fourth Report of Session 2004–05 Volume I Report, together with formal minutes Ordered by The House of Commons to be printed 22 February 2005 HC 370–I Published on 10 March 2005 by authority of the House of Commons London: The Stationery Office Limited £13.50 Home Affairs Committee The Home Affairs Committee is appointed by the House of Commons to examine the expenditure, administration and policy of the Home Office and its associated public bodies; and the administration and expenditure of the Attorney General’s Office, the Treasury Solicitor’s Department, the Crown Prosecution Service and the Serious Fraud Office (but excluding individual cases and appointments and advice given within government by Law Officers). Current membership Mr John Denham MP (Labour, Southampton, Itchen) (Chairman) Janet Anderson MP (Labour, Rossendale and Darwen) Mr James Clappison MP (Conservative, Hertsmere) Mrs Claire Curtis-Thomas MP (Labour, Crosby) Mrs Janet Dean MP (Labour, Burton) Mr Damian Green MP (Conservative, Ashford) Mr Gwyn Prosser MP (Labour, Dover) Bob Russell MP (Liberal Democrat, Colchester) Mr Marsha Singh MP (Labour, Bradford West) Mr John Taylor MP (Conservative, Solihull) David Winnick MP (Labour, Walsall North) Powers The Committee is one of the departmental select committees, the powers of which are set out in House of Commons Standing Orders, principally in SO No 152. These are available on the Internet via www.parliament.uk. Publications The Reports and evidence of the Committee are published by The Stationery Office by Order of the House. All publications of the Committee (including press notices) are on the Internet at www.parliament.uk/homeaffairscom.
    [Show full text]
  • United Kingdom: Phase 2 Report on the Application of the Convention On
    DIRECTORATE FOR FINANCIAL AND ENTERPRISE AFFAIRS UNITED KINGDOM: PHASE 2 REPORT ON THE APPLICATION OF THE CONVENTION ON COMBATING BRIBERY OF FOREIGN PUBLIC OFFICIALS IN INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS TRANSACTIONS AND THE 1997 RECOMMENDATION ON COMBATING BRIBERY IN INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS TRANSACTIONS This report was approved and adopted by the Working Group on Bribery in International Business Transactions on 17 March 2005. TABLE OF CONTENTS A. INTRODUCTION ..............................................................................................................4 1. Nature of the on-site visit ................................................................................................4 2. General observations .......................................................................................................5 a) Observations about system of government and legal system ....................................5 b) Economic factors .......................................................................................................6 c) General observations about the United Kingdom’s implementation of the Convention and 1997 Recommendation..........................................................7 d) Developments since the Phase 1 Examination...........................................................8 (i) Phase 1 and Phase 1 bis Examinations ..................................................................8 (ii) The Draft Corruption Bill ......................................................................................9 (iii) Other Legislative
    [Show full text]
  • Police Reform Act 2002
    Status: This version of this Act contains provisions that are prospective. Changes to legislation: There are outstanding changes not yet made by the legislation.gov.uk editorial team to Police Reform Act 2002. Any changes that have already been made by the team appear in the content and are referenced with annotations. (See end of Document for details) Police Reform Act 2002 2002 CHAPTER 30 An Act to make new provision about the supervision, administration, functions and conduct of police forces, police officers and other persons serving with, or carrying out functions in relation to, the police; to amend police powers and to provide for the exercise of police powers by persons who are not police officers; to amend the law relating to anti-social behaviour orders; to amend the law relating to sex offender orders; and for connected purposes. [24th July 2002] BE IT ENACTED by the Queen’s most Excellent Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, and Commons, in this present Parliament assembled, and by the authority of the same, as follows:— PART 1 POWERS OF THE SECRETARY OF STATE 1 National Policing Plan After section 36 of the 1996 Act there shall be inserted— “36A National Policing Plan (1) It shall be the duty of the Secretary of State, before the beginning of each financial year, to prepare a National Policing Plan for that year. (2) The Secretary of State shall lay the National Policing Plan for a financial year before Parliament. (3) Subject to subsection (4), any such plan must be laid before Parliament not later than 30th November in the preceding financial year.
    [Show full text]
  • Community Safety Accreditation Scheme (CSAS) Policy And
    • Community Safety Accreditation Scheme (CSAS) Policy and Procedure Reference No. P03:2013 Implementation date 31.05.2013 Version Number 1.3 Linked documents Reference No: Name. ACPO Community Safety Accreditation Schemes (CSAS) Guidance 2012 Skills for Security Document P15:2011 ASB Policy Community Safety Accreditation Scheme South West Region P03C:2013 (Traffic) Protocols and Procedures Suitable for Publication Policy Section Yes Procedure Section Yes Protective Marking Not Protectively Marked PRINTED VERSIONS SHOULD NOT BE RELIED UPON. THE MOST UP TO DATE VERSION CAN BE FOUND ON THE FORCE INTRANET POLICIES SITE. Not Protected Table of Contents 1 Policy Section ....................................................................................................................... 4 1.1 Statement of Intent – Aim and Rationale ......................................................................... 4 1.2 Our Visions and Values ................................................................................................... 4 1.3 People, Confidence and Equality ..................................................................................... 5 2 Standards .............................................................................................................................. 5 2.1 Legal Basis ...................................................................................................................... 5 2.2 People, Confidence and Equality Impact Assessment ..................................................... 6 2.3
    [Show full text]
  • Devolution of Police Powers a Guide for Decision-Makers
    Devolution of Police Powers Law & Law Governance October A Guide for Decision-makers 2016 Devolution of Police Powers A Guide for Decision-makers This guide was compiled by a team comprising K.C. Logeswaran, V.T. Thamilmaran, Viran Corea, Niran Anketell, Galusha Wirithamulla and Vidya Nathaniel. Verité Research aims to be a leader in the provision of information and analysis for negotiations and policy making in Asia, while also promoting dialogue and education for the areas of economics, sociology, politics, law, and media, and provides services in data social development in the region. The �irm contributes actively to research and dialogue in Emailcollection, comments information to: [email protected] veri�ication, strategy development, and decision analysis. Copyright © 2016 Verité Research Pvt Ltd. All rights reserved. Intended for recipient only and not for further distribution without the consent of Verité Research Pvt Ltd. This is a republication of a study initially published in July 2013. Devolution of Police Powers Table of Contents Executive Summary ......................................................................................................................................... ii part 1: the framework ............................................................................................................................ 1 1.1. Constitutional framework .................................................................................................. 1 1.2. The nature of powers relating to law and order
    [Show full text]
  • Police Reform Act 2002 (C
    Police Reform Act 2002 (c. 30) 1 SCHEDULE 5 – Powers exercisable by accredited persons Document Generated: 2021-08-09 Changes to legislation: There are outstanding changes not yet made by the legislation.gov.uk editorial team to Police Reform Act 2002. Any changes that have already been made by the team appear in the content and are referenced with annotations. (See end of Document for details) View outstanding changes SCHEDULES SCHEDULE 5 Section 41 POWERS EXERCISABLE BY ACCREDITED PERSONS Power to issue fixed penalty notices 1 (1) An accredited person whose accreditation specifies that this paragraph applies to him shall have the powers specified in sub-paragraph (2) in relation to any individual who he has reason to believe has committed or is committing a relevant fixed penalty offence at a place within the relevant police area. (2) Those powers are the following powers so far as exercisable in respect of a relevant [F1fixed penalty] offence— (a) the power of a constable in uniform to give a person a fixed penalty notice under section 54 of the Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988 (c. 53) (fixed penalty notices) in respect of an offence under section 72 of the Highway Act 1835 (c. 50) (riding on a footway) committed by cycling; [F2(aa) the powers of a constable F3... to give a penalty notice under Chapter 1 of Part 1 of the Criminal Justice and Police Act 2001 (fixed penalty notices in respect of offences of disorder) F4. ;] [F5(ab) the power of a constable to give a penalty notice under section 444A of the Education Act 1996 (penalty notice in respect of failure to secure regular attendance at school of registered pupil);] [F6(ac) the power of a constable to give a penalty notice under section 105 of the Education and Inspections Act 2006 (penalty notice in respect of presence of excluded pupil in public place);] (b) F7.
    [Show full text]
  • Reforming the Powers of Police Staff and Volunteers a Consultation on the Way Chief Officers Designate the Powers and Roles of Police Staff and Volunteers
    Reforming the Powers of Police Staff and Volunteers A Consultation on the way Chief Officers Designate the Powers and Roles of Police Staff and Volunteers September 2015 Reforming the way Chief Officers Designate the Powers and Roles of Police Staff and Volunteers 1. Foreword by the Home Secretary .......... 3 2. Executive Summary ............................... 4 3. Introduction and background .................. 5 4. Issues and options ................................. 7 5. Impact of proposals ................................ 12 6. Consultation questions ........................... 13 7. How to respond ...................................... 14 Annex A: List of Current Police Staff Powers ......... 15 Annex B: List of Powers Specific to PCSOs ........... 19 2 Foreword by the Home Secretary The historic office of constable is at the very heart of the policing of England and Wales. Police officers across the country carry out a wide range of duties, keeping the public safe and ensuring justice for the most vulnerable members of society. We value the essential role they play, but they cannot do this on their own. Traffic Wardens, Police Community Support Officers (PCSOs) and other designated police staff have played a key role in policing our communities in recent years and we believe that they can play a greater role in the future, bringing new skills and expertise, and freeing up police officers to concentrate on the core policing task that most requires their particular powers and experience. Volunteers also play a vital role in community safety. Since 1831, Special Constables have taken many of the same risks as full-time police officers, for no reward other than the satisfaction of playing their part in keeping their communities safe from crime.
    [Show full text]