Legalize / United Kingdom / Statutory-Instrument

The Police (Conduct) Regulations 2020

Type Statutory-Instrument

Publication 2020-01-06

Last updated 2025-05-28

State In force

Department King's Printer of Acts of Parliament

Source legislation.gov.uk

PDF Download

articles Not indexed

Reform history JSON API

Made: 6th January 2020

Laid before Parliament: 10th January 2020

Coming into force: 1st February 2020

The Secretary of State makes the following Regulations, in exercise of the powers conferred by sections 50(1), (2)(e) and (f), (2A), (3), (3A) to (3G), (4) and (7), 51(1), (2)(b), (2)(ba) and (c), (2A) to (2H), (3A) and (4), 84(1) to (6), 88A(2)(b) and 88G(1)(b) of the Police Act 1996 , section 36(1(a) and (b) of, and paragraph 29 of Schedule 3 to, the Police Reform Act 2002 and section 29(7) of the Policing and Crime Act 2017 .

In accordance with section 63(3)(a) of the Police Act 1996 , the Secretary of State has supplied a draft of these Regulations to the Police Advisory Board for England and Wales and has taken into consideration the representations made by that Board before making these Regulations.

PART 1 — Preliminary

Citation and commencement

1

These Regulations may be cited as the Police (Conduct) Regulations 2020 and come into force on 1st February 2020.

Interpretation and delegation

2

(1) In these Regulations—

“the 1996 Act” means the Police Act 1996;

“the 2002 Act” means the Police Reform Act 2002;

“the Complaints and Misconduct Regulations” means the Police (Complaints and Misconduct Regulations) 2020 ;

“the Performance Regulations” means the Police (Performance) Regulations 2020 ;

“the Police Regulations” means the Police Regulations 2003 ;

“the Vetting Regulations” means the Police (Vetting) Regulations 2025;

“accelerated misconduct hearing” means a hearing to which the officer concerned is referred under regulation 49 after the case has been certified as one where the special conditions are satisfied;

“acting chief officer” means—a person exercising or performing functions of a chief constable in accordance with section 41 of the Police Reform and Social Responsibility Act 2011 (power of deputy to exercise functions of chief constable);a person exercising powers or duties of the Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis in accordance with section 44 (functions of Deputy Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis) or 45(4) (Assistant Commissioners of Police of the Metropolis) of that Act, ora person exercising duties of the Commissioner of Police for the City of London in accordance with section 25 of the City of London Police Act 1839 ;

“allegation” means an allegation relating to a complaint, conduct matter or practice requiring improvement;

“appeal meeting” means a meeting held in accordance with regulation 46;

“appropriate authority” means, subject to regulation 26(3)—where the officer concerned is the chief officer or acting chief officer of any police force, the local policing body for the force's area;in any other case, the chief officer of police of the police force concerned;

“complainant” has the meaning given to it by section 29(2) of the 2002 Act (interpretation of Part 2) ;

“complaint” has the meaning given to it by section 12 of the 2002 Act (complaints, matters and persons to which Part 2 applies) ;

“conduct” includes acts, omissions, statements and decisions (whether actual, alleged or inferred);

“conduct matter” has the meaning given to it by section 12 of the 2002 Act (complaints, matters and persons to which Part 2 applies) ;

“criminal proceedings” means—any prospective criminal proceedings, orall criminal proceedings brought which have not been brought to a conclusion (apart from the bringing and determination of any appeal other than an appeal against conviction to the Crown Court);

“designated police volunteer” means a person designated as a community support volunteer or a policing support volunteer under section 38(1A) of the Police Reform Act 2002;

“Director General” means the Director General of the Independent Office for Police Conduct, established under section 9 of the 2002 Act (the Independent Office for Police Conduct) ;

“disciplinary action” means, in order of seriousness starting with the least serious action—a written warning;a final written warning;reduction in rank, ordismissal without notice;

“disciplinary proceedings” means—misconduct proceedings under Part 4 of these Regulations;an accelerated misconduct hearing under Part 5 of these Regulations, oran appeal from misconduct proceedings or from an accelerated misconduct hearing under the Police Appeals Tribunals Rules 2020 , but, for the purposes of the following provisions, “disciplinary proceedings” only includes misconduct proceedings mentioned in paragraph (a) and a hearing mentioned in paragraph (b) of this definition—paragraph (a) of the definition of “disciplinary proceedings” in section 87(5) of the 1996 Act (guidance concerning disciplinary proceedings etc.) ;paragraph (a) of the definition of “disciplinary proceedings” in section 29(1) of the 2002 Act (interpretation of Part 2) ;section 36(2) of the 2002 Act (conduct of disciplinary proceedings) ;

“document” means anything in which information of any description is recorded;

“gross misconduct” means a breach of the Standards of Professional Behaviour that is so serious as to justify dismissal , and for the purposes of these Regulations conduct which has resulted in conviction of an indictable-only offence is to be taken to constitute such a breach;

“harm test” has the meaning given to it in regulation 6;

“HMCIC” means Her Majesty's Chief Inspector of Constabulary appointed under section 54(1) of the 1996 Act (appointment and functions of inspectors of constabulary);

“human resources professional” means a police officer or police staff member who has specific responsibility for personnel matters relating to members of a police force;

“informant” means a person who provides information to an investigation on the basis that the person's identity is not disclosed during the course of the disciplinary proceedings;

“interested person” means a person who has an interest in being kept properly informed about the handling of a complaint or conduct matter in accordance with section 21 of the 2002 Act (duty to provide information for other persons) ;

“investigator” means a person—appointed under regulation 15, orappointed or designated under paragraph 16, 18 or 19 of Schedule 3 to the 2002 Act (investigations) , as the case may be;

“line manager” means the police officer or the police staff member who has immediate supervisory responsibility for the officer concerned;

“misconduct”, other than in regulation 23(2)(a) and the first reference to “misconduct” in regulation 23(2)(b), means a breach of the Standards of Professional Behaviour that is so serious as to justify disciplinary action;

“misconduct hearing” means a hearing to which the officer concerned has been referred under regulation 23 to determine whether the conduct of the officer amounts to misconduct or gross misconduct or neither and , if it amounts to misconduct or gross misconduct, what disciplinary action should be imposed;

“misconduct meeting” means a meeting to which the officer concerned has been referred under regulation 23 to determine whether the conduct of the officer amounts to misconduct or not and , if it amounts to misconduct, what disciplinary action should be imposed;

“misconduct proceedings” means a misconduct meeting or misconduct hearing;

“officer concerned” means the police officer in relation to whose conduct there has been an allegation;

“originating authority” has the meaning given to it in regulation 26(3);

“personal record” means a personal record kept under regulation 15 of the Police Regulations (contents of personal records) ;

“police barred list” means the list referred to in section 88B(2) of the 1996 Act (duty to maintain police barred list) ;

“police force concerned” means—the police force of which the officer concerned is a member, orwhere the officer concerned is a special constable, the police force maintained for the police area for which the officer is appointed;

“police friend” means a person chosen by the officer concerned in accordance with regulation 7;

“police officer” means a member of a police force or special constable;

“police staff member” means—a member of the civilian staff of a police force, within the meaning of section 102(4) and (6) of the Police Reform and Social Responsibility Act 2011 (interpretation of Part 1), oran employee of the Common Council of the City of London who is under the direction and control of a chief officer;

“practice requiring improvement” has the meaning given in paragraph (7);

“pre-commencement allegation” means an allegation against a police officer which came to the attention of a local policing body or a chief officer of police before 1st February 2020;

“proposed witness” means a witness whose attendance at the misconduct proceedings the officer concerned or the appropriate authority, as the case may be, wishes to request of the person conducting or chairing those proceedings;

“reflective practice review process” means the process set out in Part 6;

“relevant lawyer” has the meaning given to it by section 84(4) of the 1996 Act (representation etc. at disciplinary and other proceedings) ;

“senior officer” means a member of a police force holding a rank above that of chief superintendent;

“severity assessment” has the meaning given to it in regulation 14;

“special conditions” has the meaning given to it in regulation 49;

“staff association” means—in relation to a member of a police force of the rank of chief inspector or below or a special constable, the Police Federation of England and Wales;in relation to a member of a police force of the rank of superintendent or chief superintendent, the Police Superintendents' Association, andin relation to a member of a police force who is a senior officer, the Chief Police Officers' Staff Association;

“Standards of Professional Behaviour” has the meaning given in regulation 5 and references in these Regulations to the Standards of Professional Behaviour are to be construed accordingly ;

“working day” means any day other than—a Saturday or Sunday;Christmas Day or Good Friday, ora day which is a bank holiday under the Banking and Financial Dealings Act 1971 in England and Wales.

(2) In these Regulations—

(a) a reference to an officer other than a senior officer includes a reference to a special constable, regardless of the officer's level of seniority;

(b) a reference to a copy of a statement, where it was not made in writing, is to be construed as a reference to a copy of an account of that statement.

(2A) For the purposes of these Regulations, an offence is an “indictable-only” offence if—

(a) in the case of an offence under the law of England and Wales or Northern Ireland, it is an offence which, if committed by an adult, is triable only on indictment;

(b) in the case of an offence under the law of Scotland, it is an offence triable only on indictment.

(3) Where the appropriate authority is a chief officer of police, the chief officer may, subject to paragraphs (4) and (4A), delegate any functions under these Regulations to a—

(a) member of a police force of at least the rank of inspector, or

(b) police staff member who, in the opinion of the chief officer, is of at least a similar level of seniority to an inspector.

(4) Where the appropriate authority delegates its functions under regulation 11 or 49, the following decisions must be authorised by a senior officer—

(a) a decision under regulation 11 to suspend an officer or to continue or end such a suspension;

(b) a decision under regulation 49 as to whether to certify a case as one where the special conditions are satisfied.

(4A) Where a chief officer of police is required to—

(a) chair misconduct proceedings under regulation 28(4)(a); or

(b) conduct an accelerated misconduct hearing under regulation 55,

the chief officer of police may delegate the responsibility for chairing or conducting the disciplinary proceedings in accordance with paragraphs (4B) and (4C).

(4B) Where the chief officer of police delegates under paragraph (4A) the responsibility for chairing or conducting disciplinary proceedings, the person to whom that responsibility is delegated must be—

(a) a senior officer;

(b) a former senior officer, who last served as a senior officer no more than five years before the date on which the responsibility for chairing or conducting the disciplinary proceedings is to be delegated to them; or

(c) unless the case to which the disciplinary proceedings relate substantially involves operational policing matters, a police staff member who, in the opinion of the chief officer of police, is of at least a similar level of seniority to a senior officer.

(4C) But where the chief officer of police delegates, under paragraph (3), their functions under regulation 49, the person to whom the responsibility has been delegated under paragraph (4A) must not be the same senior officer who—

(a) certified the case under regulation 49 as being one where the special conditions are satisfied; or

(b) authorised the decision to certify under paragraph (4)(b).

(4D) For the purposes of paragraph (4B)—

(a) “senior officer” includes a member of a police force who is required to perform the duties normally performed by a member of a police force holding a rank above that of chief superintendent;

(b) “former senior officer” includes a person who, at the time they ceased to be a member of a police force, was required to perform the duties normally performed by a member of a police force holding a rank above that of chief superintendent.

(5) For the purposes of these Regulations, the making of a protected disclosure by a police officer is not a breach of the Standards of Professional Behaviour.

(6) In paragraph (5), “protected disclosure” has the meaning given by section 43A of the Employment Rights Act 1996 (meaning of protected disclosure) .

(7) In these Regulations, “practice requiring improvement” means underperformance or conduct not amounting to misconduct or gross misconduct, which falls short of the expectations of the public and the police service.

(8) When a person assesses whether an officer’s performance or conduct amounts to “practice requiring improvement”, they must have regard to the Code of Ethics, published by the College of Policing, as amended from time to time.

Revocations and transitional provisions

3

(1) Subject to paragraph (2), the following are revoked—

(a) the Police (Conduct) Regulations 2012 (“the 2012 Regulations”);

(b) the Police (Conduct) (Amendment) Regulations 2014 ;

(d) the following provisions of the Police (Conduct, Complaints and Misconduct and Appeal Tribunal) (Amendment) Regulations 2017 —

(i) regulation 1 in so far as it applies to the 2012 Regulations;

(ii) regulation 2(1) and (3) (transitional provision);

(iii) Part 2 (amendment of the 2012 Regulations);

(iv) Schedule 1 (modifications to the 2012 Regulations).

(2) Subject to regulation 4(7), the Regulations and provisions mentioned in paragraph (1) and regulations 2(1) and 10(1)(a) of the Police Barred List and Police Advisory List Regulations 2017 as in force immediately before these Regulations come into force continue to have effect in relation to—

(a) a pre-commencement allegation;

(b) an allegation against a police officer which comes to the attention of a local policing body or a chief officer of police on or after 1st February 2020 and which relates to a matter in respect of which a pre-commencement allegation against that person was made, if at the time the allegation is made the pre-commencement allegation is being handled in accordance with—

(i) any of the Regulations and provisions in paragraph (1), or

(ii) Part 2 of the 2002 Act.

Application

4

(1) Subject to paragraph (6), these Regulations apply where an allegation comes to the attention of an appropriate authority which indicates that the conduct of a police officer may amount to misconduct, gross misconduct or practice requiring improvement.

(2) Subject to paragraph (6) and except as set out in paragraph (8), these Regulations also apply, with the modifications set out in Schedule 1, where—

(a) an allegation comes to the attention of a relevant body which indicates that the conduct of a person who at the time of the alleged conduct was a police officer (“P”) may amount to gross misconduct , and

(b) condition A, B or C is satisfied.

(3) Condition A is that P ceased to be a police officer after the allegation first came to the attention of a relevant body.

(4) Condition B is that—

(a) P ceased to be a police officer before the allegation first came to the attention of a relevant body, and

(b) the period between the date P ceased to be a police officer and the date the allegation first came to the attention of the relevant body did not exceed 12 months.

(5) Condition C is that—

(a) P ceased to be a police officer before the allegation first came to the attention of a relevant body;

(b) the period between the date P ceased be a police officer and the date the allegation first came to the attention of the relevant body exceeded 12 months, and

(c) the Director General makes a Condition C special determination under Part 1A of these Regulations (as inserted by way of modification of these Regulations by paragraph (2) and Schedule 1) that taking disciplinary proceedings against P in respect of the alleged gross misconduct would be reasonable and proportionate.

(6) Subject to paragraph (7), these Regulations do not apply in relation to—

(a) a pre-commencement allegation, or

(b) an allegation against a police officer which comes to the attention of a local policing body or a chief officer of police on or after 1st February 2020 and which relates to a matter in respect of which a pre-commencement allegation against that person was made, if at the time the allegation is made the pre-commencement allegation is being handled in accordance with—

(i) any of the Regulations and provisions in regulation 3(1), or

(ii) Part 2 of the 2002 Act.

(7) Where the Director General—

(a) determines, under section 13B of the 2002 Act (power of the Director General to require re-investigation) that a complaint or matter is to be re-investigated, or

(b) makes a direction under section 28A(1) or (4) of the 2002 Act (application of Part 2 to old cases) in relation to a matter on or after 1st February 2020,

these Regulations apply regardless of when the complaint or matter came to the attention of the appropriate authority.

(8) Paragraph (2) does not apply if—

(a) it relates to a person who ceased to be a police officer before 15th December 2017 ; or

(b) the disciplinary proceedings would not be the first disciplinary proceedings to be taken against P in respect of the alleged gross misconduct unless they result from a re-investigation of the allegation (whether carried out under these Regulations or under the 2002 Act) that begins not later than 12 months after the date on which P ceased to be a police officer.

(9) Where an appropriate authority is considering more than one allegation in relation to the same police officer, or person in relation to whom these Regulations apply by virtue of paragraph (2), the allegations may be taken together and treated as a single allegation for the purposes of any provision of these Regulations which requires a person to make an assessment, finding, determination or decision in connection with conduct which is the subject matter of an allegation.

(10) In this regulation, “relevant body” means—

(a) a chief officer of police;

(b) a local policing body, or

PART 2 — General

Standards of Professional Behaviour

5

The Standards of Professional Behaviour established are the standards of professional behaviour described in Schedule 2.

The harm test

6

Information in documents which are stated to be subject to the harm test under these Regulations must not be supplied to the officer concerned in so far as the appropriate authority considers that preventing disclosure to the officer is—

(a) necessary for the purpose of preventing the premature or inappropriate disclosure of information that is relevant to, or may be used in, any criminal proceedings;

(b) necessary in the interests of national security;

(d) necessary for the purpose of the prevention or detection of misconduct by other police officers or police staff members or their apprehension for such matters;

(e) justified on the grounds that providing the information would involve disproportionate effort in comparison to the seriousness of the allegations against the officer;

(f) necessary and proportionate for the protection of the welfare and safety of any informant or witness, or

(g) otherwise in the public interest.

Police friend

7

(1) The officer concerned may choose—

(a) a police officer;

(b) a police staff member, or

who is not otherwise involved in the matter, to act as a police friend.

(2) Subject to regulation 66(1), the police friend may—

(a) advise the officer concerned throughout the proceedings under these Regulations;

(b) represent the officer at the misconduct proceedings or accelerated misconduct hearing or appeal meeting, unless the officer has the right to be legally represented and chooses to be so represented;

(c) make representations to the appropriate authority concerning any aspect of the proceedings under these Regulations, and

(d) accompany the officer to any interview, meeting or hearing which forms part of any proceedings under these Regulations.

(3) Where the police friend is a police officer or a police staff member, the chief officer of police of the force of which the police friend is a member must permit the police friend to use a reasonable amount of duty time for the purposes referred to in paragraph (2).

(4) The reference in paragraph (3) to the force of which the police friend is a member includes a reference to the force maintained for the police area for which a special constable is appointed and the force in which a police staff member is serving.

Legal and other representation

8

(1) Subject to paragraph (2), the officer concerned has the right to be legally represented, by a relevant lawyer of the officer's choice (“preferred lawyer”), at a misconduct hearing or an accelerated misconduct hearing.

(2) The unavailability of one or more preferred lawyers is not a valid ground for delaying a misconduct hearing or an accelerated misconduct hearing where an alternative relevant lawyer can be found.

(3) If the officer concerned chooses not to be legally represented at such a hearing the officer may be dismissed or receive any other outcome under regulation 42 or 62 without being so represented.

(4) Except in a case where the officer concerned has the right to be legally represented and chooses to be so represented, the officer may be represented at misconduct proceedings or an accelerated misconduct hearing or an appeal meeting only by a police friend.

(5) The appropriate authority or, where functions have been delegated under regulation 26(1), the originating authority, may be represented at misconduct proceedings or an accelerated misconduct hearing or an appeal meeting by—

(a) a police officer or police staff member of the police force concerned, or

(b) at a misconduct hearing or an accelerated misconduct hearing only, a relevant lawyer (whether or not the officer concerned chooses to be legally represented).

(6) Subject to paragraph (7), the appropriate authority may appoint a person to advise the person conducting or chairing a misconduct meeting or an appeal meeting.

(7) ... The person appointed under paragraph (6) must not be a relevant lawyer.

(8) The circumstances in which the Independent Office for Police Conduct is a relevant authority for the purpose of section 84(5) of the 1996 Act (power to prescribe in regulations, in relation to representation at proceedings, circumstances in which the relevant authority includes the Independent Office for Police Conduct) are prescribed as being where the Director General has made a decision under regulation 24(1) to present the case.

(9) Where the circumstances prescribed in paragraph (8) apply, the Director General may be represented by a relevant lawyer.

Provision of notices or documents

9

(1) Subject to paragraph (2), where any written notice or document is to be given or supplied to the officer concerned under these Regulations, it must be—

(a) given to the officer in person;

(b) sent to the officer by e-mail or other means of electronic communication;

(c) given to the officer in person by the officer's police friend where the police friend has agreed with the appropriate authority to deliver the notice or document, or

(d) given to the officer in any other manner agreed between the person who is required to give the notice or document and the officer.

(2) Where it is not reasonably practicable to give or supply a written notice or document to the officer concerned under paragraph (1)(a) or (b) and there is no agreement under paragraph (1)(c) or (d), the written notice or document must be—

(a) left with a person at the officer’s last known address, or

(b) sent to the officer’s last known address by first class post by recorded delivery or other service which provides for delivery on the next working day (“by post”).

(3) Where a written notice or document is sent by e-mail or other means of electronic communication, it is to be taken to have been given or supplied to the officer concerned—

(a) if the e-mail or other electronic transmission is sent on a working day before 4.30 p.m., on that day, or

(b) in any other case, on the next working day after the day on which it was sent.

(4) Where a written notice or document is sent by post, it is to be taken to have been given or supplied to the officer concerned—

(a) on the second day after it was posted, left with, delivered to or collected by the relevant service provider, provided that day is a working day, or

(b) in any other case, on the next working day after the day on which it was posted, left with, delivered to or collected by the relevant service provider.

Outstanding or possible criminal proceedings

10

(1) Subject to the provisions of this regulation, proceedings under these Regulations must proceed without delay.

(2) Before referring a case to misconduct proceedings or an accelerated misconduct hearing, the appropriate authority must decide whether misconduct proceedings or an accelerated misconduct hearing would prejudice any criminal proceedings.

(3) For any period during which the appropriate authority considers any misconduct proceedings or accelerated misconduct hearing would prejudice any criminal proceedings, no such misconduct proceedings or accelerated misconduct hearing may take place.

(4) Where a witness who is or may be a witness in any criminal proceedings is to be or may be asked to attend misconduct proceedings, the appropriate authority must consult the relevant prosecutor (and when doing so must inform the prosecutor of the names and addresses of all such witnesses) before making its decision under paragraph (2).

(5) For the purposes of this regulation “relevant prosecutor” means the Director of Public Prosecutions or any other person who has or is likely to have responsibility for the criminal proceedings.

Suspension

11

(1) The appropriate authority may, subject to the provisions of this regulation, suspend the officer concerned from the office of constable and (in the case of a member of a police force) from membership of the force .

(2) An officer who is suspended under this regulation remains a police officer for the purposes of these Regulations.

(3) A suspension under this regulation must be with pay.

(4) The appropriate authority may not suspend a police officer under this regulation unless the following conditions (“the suspension conditions”) are satisfied—

(a) having considered temporary redeployment to alternative duties or an alternative location as an alternative to suspension, the appropriate authority has determined that such redeployment is not appropriate in all the circumstances of the case, and

(b) it appears to the appropriate authority that either—

(i) the effective investigation of the case may be prejudiced unless the officer concerned is so suspended, or

(ii) having regard to the nature of the allegation and any other relevant considerations, the public interest requires that the officer should be so suspended.

(5) The appropriate authority may exercise the power to suspend the officer concerned under this regulation at any time beginning with the day on which these Regulations first apply in respect of the officer in accordance with regulation 4 and ending with the date on which—

(a) it is decided that the conduct of the officer should not be referred to misconduct proceedings or an accelerated misconduct hearing, or

(b) such proceedings have concluded.

(6) The appropriate authority may suspend the officer concerned with effect from the date and time of notification which must be given either—

(a) in writing with a summary of the reasons, or

(b) orally, in which case the appropriate authority must confirm the suspension in writing with a summary of the reasons before the end of 3 working days beginning with the first working day after the suspension.

(7) The officer concerned (or the officer's police friend) may make representations against suspension to the appropriate authority—

(a) before the end of 7 working days beginning with the first working day after being suspended;

(b) at any time during the suspension if the officer reasonably believes that circumstances relevant to the suspension conditions have changed.

(8) The appropriate authority must review the suspension conditions—

(a) on receipt of any representations under paragraph (7);

(b) if there has been no previous review, before the end of 4 weeks beginning with the first working day after the suspension;

(i) when it becomes aware that circumstances relevant to the suspension conditions may have changed (whether by means of representations made under paragraph (7)(b) or otherwise), or

(ii) before the end of 4 weeks beginning with the first working day after the previous review.

(9) Where, following a review under paragraph (8), the suspension conditions remain satisfied and the appropriate authority decides the suspension should continue, it must, before the end of 3 working days beginning with the day after the review, so notify the officer concerned in writing with a summary of the reasons.

(10) Where the officer concerned is suspended under this regulation, the officer must remain so suspended until whichever of the following occurs first—

(a) the appropriate authority decides, following a review, that the suspension conditions are no longer satisfied;

(b) either of the events mentioned in paragraph (5)(a) and (b).

(11) In a case to which paragraph 18 or 19 of Schedule 3 to the 2002 Act (directed and independent investigations) applied, the appropriate authority must consult with the Director General—

(a) in deciding whether or not to suspend the officer concerned under this regulation, and

(b) in deciding, following a review, whether or not to end a suspension under this regulation.

Record of disciplinary proceedings

12

The appropriate authority must cause a record to be kept of disciplinary proceedings brought against every officer concerned, together with the finding and decision on disciplinary action and the decision in any appeal by the officer.

PART 3 — Investigations

Application of this Part

13

This Part does not apply to a case to which paragraph 16, 18 or 19 of Schedule 3 to the 2002 Act (investigations) applies .

Severity assessment

14

(1) The appropriate authority must assess whether the conduct which is the subject matter of the allegation, if proved, would amount to misconduct or gross misconduct or neither (“the severity assessment”).

(2) Where the appropriate authority assesses that the conduct, if proved, would amount to neither misconduct nor gross misconduct, it must assess whether—

(a) the conduct, if proved, would amount to practice requiring improvement;

(aa) the matter should be referred to be dealt with under the Vetting Regulations;

(b) the matter should be referred to be dealt with under the Performance Regulations, or

(3) The appropriate authority must consult the line manager of the officer concerned before making an assessment in terms of paragraph (2)(a) , (aa) or (b).

(4) Where the appropriate authority assesses that the conduct, if proved, would amount to practice requiring improvement, it must refer the matter to be dealt with under the reflective practice review process set out in Part 6.

(5) Where the appropriate authority assesses that the conduct, if proved, would amount to misconduct or gross misconduct—

(a) the matter must be investigated, and

(b) the appropriate authority must assess whether, if the matter were to be referred to misconduct proceedings under regulation 23, those would be likely to be a misconduct meeting or a misconduct hearing.

(6) At any time before the start of misconduct proceedings, the appropriate authority may revise its severity assessment under this regulation if it considers it appropriate to do so.

(7) Where the appropriate authority decides under this regulation to take no further action or to refer the matter to be dealt with under the reflective practice review process , the Vetting Regulations or the Performance Regulations, it must so notify the officer concerned in writing as soon as practicable.

Appointment of investigator

15

(1) This regulation applies where the matter is to be investigated in accordance with regulation 14.

(2) The appropriate authority must appoint a person to investigate the matter.

(3) No person may be appointed to investigate a matter under this regulation—

(a) unless they have an appropriate level of knowledge, skills and experience to plan and manage the investigation;

(b) if they are an interested party;

(d) in a case where the officer concerned is a senior officer, if they are—

(i) the chief officer of police of the police force concerned;

(ii) a member of the same police force as the officer, or where the officer is a member of the metropolitan police force, serving in the same command as the officer, or

(iii) a designated police volunteer serving in that force.

(4) The reference in paragraph (3)(d)(ii) to a member of the police force includes a reference to a special constable appointed for the area of that force and a police staff member serving in that force.

(5) In this regulation, “interested party” means a person whose appointment could reasonably give rise to a concern as to whether a person could act impartially under these Regulations.

Investigation

16

(1) The purpose of the investigation is to—

(a) gather evidence to establish the facts and circumstances of the alleged misconduct or gross misconduct, and

(b) assist the appropriate authority to establish whether there is a case to answer in respect of misconduct or gross misconduct or whether there is no case to answer.

(2) The investigator must as soon as practicable after being appointed draw up the terms of reference of the investigation.

Written notices

17

(1) Subject to the harm test and except where paragraph (6) applies by virtue of sub-paragraph (a) of that paragraph, the investigator must, as soon as reasonably practicable after being appointed, give the officer concerned a written notice stating—

(a) the conduct that is the subject matter of the allegation and how that conduct is alleged to fall below the Standards of Professional Behaviour;

(b) that there is to be an investigation into the matter and the identity of the investigator;

(d) the result of any assessment under regulation 14(5)(b) as to whether any misconduct proceedings would likely be a misconduct meeting or a misconduct hearing;

(e) that if the officer is dismissed at misconduct proceedings, information including the officer's full name and a description of the conduct which led to dismissal will be added to the police barred list and may be subject to publication for a period of up to 5 years;

(f) that the officer has the right to seek advice from the officer's staff association or any other body and of the effect of regulation 7(1) and (2);

(g) the effect of regulations 8(1) to (3) and 18, and

(h) that whilst the officer does not have to say anything it may harm the officer's case if the officer does not mention when interviewed or when providing any information under regulation 18(1) or 31(2) or (3) something later relied on in any disciplinary proceedings.

(2) Where a notice is given under paragraph (1), the investigator must—

(a) subject to the harm test and except where paragraph (6) applies by virtue of sub-paragraph (b) of that paragraph, give the officer concerned the written terms of reference of the investigation, or

(b) where written terms of reference are not provided under sub-paragraph (a), give the officer concerned written notice stating that the terms of reference are not being provided and explaining why.

(3) Where practicable, the investigator must give the officer concerned the written terms of reference, or, as the case may be, the written notice, under paragraph (2), at the same time as notice is given under paragraph (1), or otherwise within a period of 5 working days, beginning with the first working day after the day on which such notice is given.

(4) Subject to the harm test and except where paragraph (6) applies by virtue of sub-paragraph (c) of that paragraph, where notice is given under paragraph (1) and the appropriate authority revises its severity assessment in accordance with regulation 14(6), the appropriate authority must as soon as practicable give the officer concerned a written notice of the result of the revised severity assessment.

(5) Subject to the harm test and except where paragraph (6) applies by virtue of sub-paragraph (d) of that paragraph, where the written terms of reference are given under paragraph (2) and those terms are revised by the investigator, the investigator must as soon as practicable give the officer concerned the revised terms of reference.

(6) This paragraph applies for so long as the investigator considers that giving—

(a) a written notice under paragraph (1);

(b) terms of reference under paragraph (2);

(d) revised terms of reference under paragraph (5),

might prejudice the investigation or any other investigation (including, in particular, a criminal investigation).

(7) Once a written notice has been given in accordance with paragraph (1), the investigator must notify the officer concerned of the progress of the investigation—

(a) if there has been no previous notification following the supply of the written notice under paragraph (1), before the end of 4 weeks beginning with the first working day after that written notice was given, and

(b) in any other case, before the end of 4 weeks beginning with the first working day after the previous notification.

Representations to the investigator

18

(1) Before the end of 10 working days beginning with the first working day after the terms of reference, or, as the case may be, written notice has been given under regulation 17(2)—

(a) the officer concerned may provide a written or oral statement relating to any matter under investigation to the investigator, including any mitigating circumstances relevant to any such matter, and

(b) the officer concerned or the officer's police friend may provide any relevant documents to the investigator.

(2) The investigator must, as part of the investigation, consider any such statement or document and must make a record of having received it.

(3) The period of 10 working days referred to in paragraph (1) may be extended by the investigator.

(4) In this regulation “relevant document”—

(a) means a document relating to any matter under investigation, and

(b) includes such a document containing suggestions as to lines of inquiry to be pursued or witnesses to be interviewed.

Timeliness of investigation

19

(1) Where an investigation is not completed within a relevant period, the appropriate authority must, subject to paragraph (3), provide as soon as practicable the following information in writing to the local policing body—

(a) the date on which the allegation came to the attention of the appropriate authority;

(b) the date on which notice was given under regulation 17(1);

(d) an estimate of when—

(i) the investigation will be concluded, and

(ii) a report will be submitted under regulation 21;

(e) the reason for the length of time taken by the investigation, and

(f) a summary of planned steps to progress the investigation and bring it to a conclusion.

(2) For the purposes of this regulation, each of the following is a “relevant period”—

(a) the first relevant period is the period of 12 months beginning with the day on which the allegation first came to the attention of the appropriate authority;

(b) each subsequent relevant period is the period of 6 months beginning with the day after the end of the previous relevant period.

(3) The requirement to provide information under paragraph (1) does not apply in a case where it appears to the appropriate authority that to do so might prejudice the investigation or any other investigation (including a criminal investigation).

(4) Subject to the harm test, a copy of the information provided under paragraph (1) or (2) must be sent to the officer concerned.

Interviews during investigation

20

(1) Where an investigator wishes to interview the officer concerned as part of the investigation, the investigator must, if reasonably practicable, agree a date and time for the interview with the officer.

(2) No interview may take place until the officer concerned has been provided with the terms of reference or, as the case may be, a written notice under regulation 17(2).

(3) Where no date and time is agreed under paragraph (1), the investigator must specify a date and time for the interview.

(4) Where a date and time is specified under paragraph (3) and—

(a) the officer concerned or the officer's police friend will not be available, and

(b) the officer proposes an alternative date or time which satisfies paragraph (5),

the interview must be postponed to the date or time proposed by the officer.

(5) An alternative time must—

(a) be reasonable, and

(b) fall before the end of the period of 5 working days beginning with the first working day after the day specified by the investigator.

(6) The investigator must give the officer concerned written notice of the date, time and place of the interview.

(7) The investigator must, in advance of the interview, provide the officer concerned with such information as the investigator considers appropriate in the circumstances of the case to enable the officer to prepare for the interview.

(8) The officer concerned must attend the interview.

(9) A police friend may not answer any questions asked of the officer concerned during the interview.

Report of investigation

21

(1) On completion of the investigation, the investigator must as soon as practicable submit a written report on the investigation to the appropriate authority.

(2) The written report must—

(a) provide an accurate summary of the evidence;

(b) attach or refer to any relevant documents;

(c) indicate the investigator's opinion as to whether there is a case to answer in respect of misconduct or gross misconduct or whether there is no case to answer, and

(d) where the investigator's opinion under sub-paragraph (c) is that there is no case to answer, indicate the investigator's opinion as to whether the matter should be referred to be dealt with under the Vetting Regulations, the Performance Regulations or the reflective practice review process.

(3) If at any time during the investigation the investigator believes that the appropriate authority would, on consideration of the matter, be likely to determine that the special conditions are satisfied, the investigator must, whether or not the investigation is complete, submit to the appropriate authority—

(a) a statement of the investigator's belief and the grounds for it, and

(b) a written report on the investigation to that point.

(4) If at any time during the investigation the investigator believes that, in light of evidence made available to the investigator that was not available to the appropriate authority when it made its severity assessment or any revised severity assessment under regulation 14, the appropriate authority would, on further consideration of the matter, be likely to determine that the conduct which is the subject matter of the allegation, if proved, would amount to neither misconduct nor gross misconduct, the investigator must, whether or not the investigation is complete, submit to the appropriate authority—

(a) a statement of the investigator's belief and the grounds for it;

(b) a written report on the investigation to that point, and

(c) a statement of the investigator's opinion as to whether the matter should be referred to be dealt with under the Vetting Regulations, the Performance Regulations or the reflective practice review process.

(5) Where a report is submitted to the appropriate authority under paragraph (4), the appropriate authority must make a further severity assessment under regulation 14.

(6) If the appropriate authority assesses that the conduct if proved would amount to misconduct or gross misconduct, the investigator must continue to proceed with the investigation that has been commenced.

(7) If the appropriate authority makes an assessment other than that the conduct if proved would amount to misconduct or gross misconduct—

(a) the case must be dealt with in accordance with regulation 14;

(b) the investigation must be promptly concluded;

(c) the appropriate authority must as soon as practicable and in addition to any notice required under regulation 14(7), give the officer concerned notice in writing that—

(i) the notice given to the officer under regulation 17(1) has been withdrawn and no further action will be taken pursuant to that notice, and

(ii) the investigation has been concluded.

PART 4 — Misconduct proceedings

General

22

Any period of time specified in this Part in relation to misconduct proceedings may be reduced by agreement between the appropriate authority or, as the case may be, the originating authority, the officer concerned, where the Director General is presenting the case, the Director General, and the person conducting or chairing the misconduct proceedings.

Referral of case to misconduct proceedings

23

(1) Subject to regulation 49, on receipt of the investigator's report under regulation 21(1), the appropriate authority must, as soon as practicable, determine—

(a) whether the officer concerned has a case to answer in respect of misconduct or gross misconduct or whether the officer has no case to answer;

(b) if there is a case to answer, whether or not misconduct proceedings should be brought against the officer, and

(2) Subject to regulation 49, on receipt of a report submitted under paragraph 22 of Schedule 3 to the 2002 Act (final reports on investigations) , in making a determination under paragraph 24(6) of that Schedule (action in response to an investigation report) as to what action to take in respect of matters dealt with in that report, the appropriate authority must, as soon as practicable determine—

(a) whether the officer concerned has a case to answer in respect of misconduct (within the meaning of paragraph 29 of Schedule 3 to the 2002 Act) or gross misconduct or whether the officer has no case to answer;

(b) where under paragraph (a) the appropriate authority determines that there is a case to answer in respect of misconduct (within the meaning of paragraph 29 of Schedule 3 to the 2002 Act), whether the case amounts to misconduct ;

(c) where there is a case to answer in respect of misconduct or gross misconduct, whether or not misconduct proceedings should be brought against the officer concerned, and

(d) if so, and subject to paragraph (10), what form the misconduct proceedings should take.

(3) In a case where the misconduct proceedings have been delayed by virtue of regulation 10(3), as soon as practicable after—

(a) the appropriate authority considers that such proceedings would no longer prejudice any criminal proceedings, or

(b) any criminal proceedings have concluded (whatever the outcome of those proceedings),

the appropriate authority must, subject to regulation 49(3) and paragraph (10) and unless the appropriate authority must refer the case to misconduct proceedings in accordance with paragraph (9), make a further determination as to the matters set out in paragraph (1)(a) to (c) or, as the case may be, paragraph (2)(a) to (d).

(4) Where the appropriate authority determines under paragraph (2)(b) or under paragraph (3) in so far as the determination relates to the matter set out in paragraph (2)(b), that the case does not amount to misconduct, the case is to be dealt with under these Regulations as if the appropriate authority had determined that there was no case to answer.

(5) Where the appropriate authority determines there is no case to answer or that no misconduct proceedings will be brought, it must assess whether—

(a) the case amounts to practice requiring improvement;

(b) the matter should be referred to be dealt with under the Vetting Regulations or the Performance Regulations, or

(6) The appropriate authority must consult the line manager of the officer concerned before making an assessment in terms of paragraph (5)(a) or (b).

(7) As soon as practicable after it has completed the assessment under paragraph (5), the appropriate authority must—

(a) inform the officer concerned of the outcome of its assessment, and

(b) subject to the harm test, give the officer a copy of the investigator's report or such parts of that report as relate to the officer.

(8) Where the appropriate authority assesses that the case amounts to practice requiring improvement, it must direct that the matter is dealt with under the reflective practice review process set out in Part 6.

(9) Where the appropriate authority —

(a) has a duty under paragraph 23(5B) of Schedule 3 to the 2002 Act (duties with respect to disciplinary proceedings) to comply with a direction to bring misconduct proceedings of a form specified in a determination of the Director General;

(b) accepts a recommendation made under paragraph 25(4C)(c) or (4E)(c) of that Schedule (reviews with respect to an investigation) that misconduct proceedings of the form specified in the recommendation are brought, or

(c) has a duty under paragraph 27(4)(b) of that Schedule (duties with respect to disciplinary proceedings etc.) to comply with a direction to give effect to a recommendation to bring misconduct proceedings of a form specified in a recommendation made under paragraph 25(4C) of that Schedule,

it must, subject to regulation 10(3), refer the case to misconduct proceedings of the form specified.

(10) Where the appropriate authority determines under paragraph (1), (2) or (3) to refer the case to misconduct proceedings—

(a) having determined that the officer concerned has a case to answer in respect of gross misconduct, those proceedings must be a misconduct hearing;

(b) where the officer had a final written warning in force at the date of the severity assessment under regulation 14(1) of these Regulations or, as the case may be, regulation 16 of the Complaints and Misconduct Regulations (special procedure: severity assessment), those proceedings must be a misconduct hearing;

(c) where the officer has been reduced in rank under the Police (Conduct) Regulations 2004 or these Regulations less than 2 years prior to the severity assessment under regulation 14(1) of these Regulations or, as the case may be, regulation 16 of the Complaints and Misconduct Regulations, those proceedings must be a misconduct hearing, and

(d) having determined that the officer has a case to answer in respect of misconduct and that the case does not fall under sub-paragraphs (a), (b) or (c), those proceedings must be a misconduct meeting.

(11) Where the appropriate authority fails to make the determination referred to in paragraph (1) or (2) before the end of 15 working days beginning with the first working day after receipt of the report, it must notify the officer concerned of the reason for this.

(12) In determining whether any criminal proceedings are to be treated as concluded for the purposes of this regulation, any right of appeal is to be disregarded.

Presenting of case by the Director General

24

(1) The Director General may decide to present the case on behalf of the appropriate authority where—

(a) paragraph (2) applies and the case is referred to a misconduct hearing or an accelerated misconduct hearing, or

(b) paragraph (4) applies and the case is referred to an accelerated misconduct hearing.

(2) This paragraph applies to a case where—

(a) it is a case in respect of which the duty referred to in regulation 23(9)(a) or (c) arises, and

(b) one of the conditions set out in paragraph (3) is satisfied.

(3) The conditions are—

(a) the appropriate authority, when its views were sought in respect of the case under paragraph 23(5A)(a)(i) of Schedule 3 to the 2002 Act (action by the Director General in relation to an investigation report under paragraph 22) , or subsequently, expressed a view on the matter referred to in that paragraph that differed from the determination of the Director General under paragraph 23(5A)(b)(i) of that Schedule;

(b) the appropriate authority notified the Director General under paragraph 25(4D)(a) of Schedule 3 to the 2002 Act (reviews with respect to an investigation) that it did not accept a recommendation of the Director General under paragraph 25(4C)(c)(i) of Schedule 3 to the 2002 Act (reviews with respect to an investigation) ;

(d) the Director General is of the view that in the particular circumstances of the case there is a compelling public interest for the Director General to present the case.

(4) This paragraph applies to a case where the appropriate authority submitted a memorandum to the Director General under regulation 26(5) of the Complaints and Misconduct Regulations (determination by the appropriate authority not to certify a case for accelerated procedure) and the Director General directed the appropriate authority to certify the case under regulation 26(8)(b) of those Regulations.

(5) Where the Director General makes a decision under paragraph (1) to present a case, the Director General must as soon as practicable inform the appropriate authority of the decision.

(6) The appropriate authority must give the Director General any assistance the Director General reasonably requires for the purpose of presenting a case.

Joint misconduct proceedings

25

(1) Subject to paragraphs (6) and (7), where under regulation 23 the appropriate authority refers two or more cases arising from the same matter or incident, which relate to more than one police officer, to a misconduct hearing, the cases may be referred to a joint misconduct hearing.

(2) Subject to paragraph (6), where under regulation 23 the appropriate authority refers two or more cases arising from the same matter or incident, which relate to more than one police officer, to a misconduct meeting, the cases may be referred to a joint misconduct meeting.

(3) Where cases are referred to joint misconduct proceedings, a reference to “the officer concerned” in regulations 26 to 44, if the context so requires, means—

(a) any of the officers concerned, or

(b) each of the officers concerned.

(4) Where cases are referred to joint misconduct proceedings, the officer concerned in any of the cases may object and request separate proceedings.

(5) The person conducting or chairing the misconduct proceedings must consider any objection under paragraph (4) and determine whether the request for separate proceedings should be allowed.

(6) Cases may only be referred to joint misconduct proceedings where all or none of the officers concerned are senior officers.

(7) A case in respect of which the Director General has made a decision to present a case under regulation 24(1) may only be referred to a joint misconduct hearing on the direction of the Director General, following consultation with the appropriate authority.

(8) The appropriate authority must comply with a direction given under paragraph (7).

Delegation of functions

26

(1) Where—

(a) the appropriate authority is the chief officer of any police force, and

(b) under regulation 23 a case is referred to a misconduct hearing,

the appropriate authority may, if it considers it appropriate in a particular case, delegate functions in relation to the administration of the hearing (but not in relation to representing it at the hearing) to the chief officer of police of another police force.

(2) Subject to regulation 25(4) to (8), where functions have been delegated to the same chief officer of police, in respect of more than one case which relates to the same matter or incident, the cases may be dealt with at a joint misconduct hearing.

(3) In these Regulations—

(a) where functions have been delegated under paragraph (1), “appropriate authority”, in relation to the exercise of such functions, means the chief officer of police to whom the functions have been delegated;

(b) “originating authority” means the chief officer of police of the force of which the officer concerned is a member which has delegated functions under paragraph (1).

(4) Where functions have been delegated, any requirement on a person other than the originating authority to supply a document to another person must be read as including a requirement to supply such document also to the originating authority.

Withdrawal of misconduct proceedings

27

(1) Subject to paragraph (4), at any time before the beginning of the misconduct proceedings, the appropriate authority—

(a) if it is no longer satisfied that there is a case to answer in respect of misconduct or gross misconduct, must direct that the case be withdrawn, and

(b) where sub-paragraph (a) does not apply, may direct that the case be withdrawn.

(2) Where a direction is given under paragraph (1)—

(a) the appropriate authority may—

(i) take no further action against the officer concerned;

(ii) refer the matter to the reflective practice review process, or

(iii) refer the matter to be dealt with under the Vetting Regulations or the Performance Regulations, and

(b) the appropriate authority must as soon as practicable give the officer concerned—

(i) written notice of the direction, indicating whether any action will be taken under paragraph (2)(a), and

(ii) where the investigation has been completed, on request and subject to the harm test, a copy of the investigator's report or such parts of that report as relate to the officer.

(3) Before referring a matter to the reflective practice review process or to be dealt with under the Vetting Regulations or the Performance Regulations, the appropriate authority must consult the line manager of the officer concerned.

(4) A case to which paragraph 16, 18 or 19 of Schedule 3 to the 2002 Act (investigations) applied may only be withdrawn—

(a) on the direction of the Director General, following consultation with the appropriate authority, in a case where the Director General—

(i) made a recommendation under paragraph 25(4C)(c) of that Schedule (duties with respect to disciplinary proceedings) which the appropriate authority accepted, or

(ii) gave a direction under paragraph 23(5A)(e) or paragraph 27(4)(a) of that Schedule to bring disciplinary proceedings, or

(b) following consultation with the Director General, in all other cases.

Persons conducting misconduct proceedings

28

(1) Where the officer concerned is an officer other than a senior officer—

(a) where the case is referred to a misconduct meeting, that meeting must be conducted by a person appointed by the appropriate authority in accordance with paragraph (3) ...;

(b) where the case is referred to a misconduct hearing, that hearing must be conducted by a panel of three persons constituted in accordance with paragraph (4).

(2) Where the officer concerned is a senior officer and the case is referred to misconduct proceedings, those misconduct proceedings must be conducted by a panel of three persons appointed in accordance with paragraphs (4) to (5A).

(3) The person appointed by the appropriate authority under paragraph (1)(a)—

(a) where the officer concerned is a member of a police force, must be either another member of a police force of at least one rank higher than the officer or, unless the case substantially involves operational policing matters, a police staff member who, in the opinion of the appropriate authority, is more senior than the officer concerned;

(b) where the officer concerned is a special constable, must be—

(i) a member of a police force of the rank of sergeant or above;

(ii) a senior human resources professional, or

(iii) unless the case substantially involves operational policing matters, a police staff member who, in the opinion of the appropriate authority, is more senior than the officer concerned.

(4) Subject to paragraphs (4A), (5) and (5A) (and see also regulation 2(4A) (delegation of responsibility for chairing or conducting misconduct proceedings)), the panel of persons must comprise—

(a) a chair, who must be the chief officer of police of the police force concerned;

(b) a person appointed by the local policing body, who—

(i) has qualifications or experience relevant for the purpose of disciplinary proceedings; and

(ii) is selected on a fair and transparent basis from the list of candidates with such qualifications or experience maintained by the local policing body for the purpose of this sub-paragraph; and

(c) a person appointed by the local policing body, who need not have such qualifications or experience, selected on a fair and transparent basis from the list of candidates maintained by the local policing body for the purpose of this sub-paragraph.

(4A) A person may not be appointed under paragraph (4)(b) or (c) unless the person is a lay person, within the meaning set out in paragraph 10(aa) of Schedule 6 to the Police Act 1996.

(5) Subject to paragraph (5A), where the officer concerned is a senior officer, for paragraph (4)(a) substitute—

(a) a chair, appointed by the appropriate authority, who must be a senior officer of a police force other than the police force concerned, who is of a more senior rank than the officer concerned;

(5A) Where the officer concerned is a chief officer of police, Deputy Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis or Assistant Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis, for paragraph (4)(a) substitute—

(a) a chair, appointed by the local policing body, who must be HMCIC or an inspector of constabulary nominated by HMCIC;

(5B) A person is to be appointed by the local policing body as an adviser to the chair and panel of persons conducting a misconduct hearing under paragraphs (4) to (5A), selected on a fair and transparent basis from a list of legally qualified persons maintained by a local policing body for the purpose of this paragraph.

(5C) The legally qualified person appointed under paragraph (5B) must provide advice to the panel of persons conducting or to the person chairing a misconduct hearing upon request by the chair in respect of any legal or procedural issues relating to the misconduct proceedings.

(5D) The panel of persons conducting or the person chairing a misconduct hearing must have regard to any advice given by the legally qualified person in accordance with paragraph (5C).

(5E) Paragraph (5F) applies where the officer concerned is not a senior officer and—

(a) the appropriate authority, when its views were sought in respect of the case under paragraph 23(5A)(a)(i) or (iii) of Schedule 3 to the 2002 Act (action by the Director General in relation to an investigation report under paragraph 22 of that Schedule), expressed a view on the matter that differed from the determination of the Director General under paragraph 23(5A)(b) of that Schedule; or

(b) the appropriate authority notified the Director General under paragraph 25(4D)(a) of Schedule 3 to the 2002 Act (reviews with respect to an investigation) that it did not accept a recommendation of the Director General under paragraph 25(4C)(c) of that Schedule (reviews with respect to an investigation).

(5F) Where this paragraph applies, the Director General may, within 10 working days beginning with the day after the day on which the Director General makes the determination referred to in paragraph (5E)(a) or the appropriate authority makes the notification referred to in paragraph (5E)(b), make written representations to the chief officer of police who is to chair the misconduct proceedings under paragraph (4)(a) as to whether the chief officer of police should delegate responsibility for chairing the misconduct proceedings to a person from a police force other than the police force concerned.

(5G) The chief officer of police to whom representations have been made under paragraph (5F) must—

(a) have regard to those representations; and

(b) within 10 working days beginning with the day on which the representations were received, determine whether or not to delegate responsibility for chairing the misconduct proceedings to a person from a police force other than the police force concerned.

(6) In this regulation “legally qualified person” means a person who satisfies the judicial-appointment eligibility condition on a 5-year basis .

(7) For the purpose of section 84(4) of the 1996 Act (power to prescribe “the panel” for the purpose of representation at proceedings), the panel of persons or the person specified by this regulation to conduct misconduct proceedings is prescribed as “the panel”.

Role of chair of misconduct hearing

29

(1) The chair of the panel constituted under regulation 28 or the person to whom the responsibility for chairing the hearing has been delegated under regulation 2(4A) must take appropriate action to ensure the efficient and effective bringing of the proceedings and that they are conducted in a timely, fair and transparent manner.

(2) In particular, and subject to paragraph (6)(a), the chair must ensure that the first day of the misconduct hearing is not more than 100 working days beginning with the day after the date on which notice is given under regulation 30(1).

(3) The chair must decide, before the end of 5 working days beginning with the first working day after the day on which the documents were supplied to the chair under regulation 32(6), whether to conduct a misconduct pre-hearing, in order to agree directions and to fix a date for the hearing in accordance with regulation 33.

(4) Where the chair decides not to conduct a misconduct pre-hearing, the chair must determine the date, time and duration of the misconduct hearing, following consultation with the parties by telephone or by such other electronic means as may be agreed between the parties or, where the parties fail to agree, as decided by the chair.

(5) Subject to paragraphs (6)(b) and (7), where paragraph (4) applies, the misconduct hearing must take place before the end of the period of 30 working days beginning with the first working day after the day on which the documents were supplied to the chair under regulation 32(6).

(6) Where the chair considers that it would be in the interests of justice to do so, the chair may extend—

(a) the period of 100 working days specified in paragraph (2);

(b) the period of 30 working days specified in paragraph (5).

(7) Any of the parties may apply to the chair for the misconduct hearing to take place later than is provided for in paragraph (5).

(8) Any such application must set out the reasons for the application.

(9) The chair must determine whether it would be in the interests of justice for the application to be granted, provided that the date fixed for the commencement of the hearing must be within the period specified in paragraph (2), or such period as extended under paragraph (6)(a).

Reading this document does not replace reading the official text published on legislation.gov.uk. Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0. We assume no responsibility for any inaccuracies arising from the conversion of the original CLML XML to this format.

This text is published under legislation.gov.uk's own terms of reuse, not a Legalize or public-domain licence. legislation.gov.uk
Open Government Licence v3.0 (attribution required)
© Crown and database right. Derived from content available under the Open Government Licence v3.0 from legislation.gov.uk.