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

(1) Where a case is certified, whether under regulation 49 or under the provisions mentioned in regulation 49(7), as one where the special conditions are satisfied and referred to an accelerated misconduct hearing, the appropriate authority must as soon as practicable give the officer concerned written notice of these matters and must supply the officer with a copy of—

(a) the certificate issued under regulation 49(4) or under one of the provisions mentioned in regulation 49(7);

(b) any statement the officer may have made to the investigator during the course of the investigation, and

(i) the investigator's report or such parts of that report as relate to the officer (together with any document attached to or referred to in that report as relates to the officer), and

(ii) any other document which might reasonably be considered capable of undermining or assisting the case.

(2) The notice given under paragraph (1) must—

(a) describe the conduct that is the subject matter of the case and how that conduct is alleged to amount to gross misconduct, ...

(b) where relevant, specify that the Director General has made a decision under regulation 24(1) to present the case,

(c) notify the officer concerned of the name of the person conducting or chairing the accelerated misconduct hearing; and

(d) notify the officer concerned of the effect of paragraphs (2C) to (2F) of this regulation.

(2A) Where, under regulation 2(4A), the chief officer of police of the police force concerned delegates responsibility for conducting an accelerated misconduct hearing to another person, the chief officer of police must, as soon as practicable afterwards, give the officer concerned written notice of the name of the person to whom that responsibility has been delegated and the effect of paragraphs (2C) to (2F) of this regulation.

(2B) As soon as practicable after a legally qualified person has been appointed under regulation 55(4A) in relation to the misconduct proceedings, the appropriate authority must give the officer concerned written notice of the name of that person the effect of paragraphs (2C) to (2F) of this regulation.

(2C) The officer concerned may object to any person whom the officer is notified under the preceding provisions of this regulation is to—

(a) conduct, or as the case may be, chair the accelerated misconduct hearing; or

(b) be the legally qualified person appointed under regulation 55(4A) in respect of the accelerated misconduct hearing.

(2D) Any such objection must be—

(a) made in writing to—

(i) the local policing body, where the person in relation to whom the objection is made was appointed by that body;

(ii) where the objection is to the chief officer of police conducting an accelerated misconduct hearing under regulation 55(1) or a person to whom the responsibility for conducting an accelerated hearing has been delegated under regulation 2(4A), the chief officer of police of the police force concerned; or

(iii) the appropriate authority in all other cases; and

(b) in the case of a joint accelerated misconduct hearing, copied to each other officer concerned,

before the end of three working days beginning with the first working day after the officer is given notice of the person’s name and must set out the grounds of objection of the officer.

(2E) The appropriate authority, the chief officer of police of the police force concerned or, as the case may be, the local policing body must notify the officer concerned in writing whether it upholds or rejects an objection to a person conducting or, as the case may be, chairing the accelerated misconduct hearing or the legally qualified person appointed under regulation 55(4A).

(2F) If the appropriate authority, the chief officer of police of the police force concerned or, as the case may be, the local policing body upholds the objection, the person to whom the officer concerned objects must be replaced (in accordance with paragraph (2G) or (2I), or regulation 2(4A) or 55, as appropriate).

(2G) Where—

(a) the person conducting the accelerated misconduct hearing is the chief officer of police of the police force concerned; and

(b) an objection is upheld against them,

the chief officer of police must delegate responsibility for conducting that accelerated misconduct hearing in accordance with regulation 2(4B) and (4C).

(2H) The delegation referred to in paragraph (2G) is to be treated as having been done under regulation 2(4A).

(2I) Where—

(a) the person chairing the accelerated misconduct hearing is appointed by the local policing body under regulation 55(4)(a); and

(b) an objection is upheld against the chair,

the local policing body must require HMCIC to chair the accelerated misconduct hearing or nominate an inspector of constabulary to replace the chair under regulation 28(5A).

(2J) As soon as reasonably practicable after any such appointment or after any such delegation, the appropriate authority must give a written notice to the officer concerned of the name of the new person who is to conduct or, as the case may be, chair the accelerated misconduct hearing or, as the case may be, the legally qualified person appointed under regulation 55(4A), and of the effects of paragraphs (2K) and (2L).

(2K) The officer concerned may object to the person who, in accordance with paragraph (2F), replaces a person in respect of whom an objection has been upheld.

(2L) In relation to an objection under paragraph (2K)—

(a) paragraph (2D) applies, except insofar as it specifies the period of time for making an objection;

(b) the objection must be made before the end of three working days beginning with the first working day after the officer concerned has been given the notice referred to in paragraph (7); and

(c) paragraphs (2E) to (2J) apply, with the exception of the requirement in paragraph (2J) for the appropriate authority to give written notice of the effects of paragraphs (2K) and this paragraph.

(3) Where the Director General has made a decision under regulation 24(1) to present a case, the appropriate authority must—

(a) consult the Director General about the contents of the written notice to be given under paragraph (1) and on the application of the harm test under paragraph (1)(c);

(b) comply with any direction given by the Director General in relation to the matters specified in paragraph (a), and

Notice of accelerated misconduct hearing

52

(1) The appropriate authority must specify a date for the accelerated misconduct hearing which must be not less than 10 and not more than 15 working days after the date on which notice is given under regulation 51(1) and must as soon as practicable—

(a) notify the officer concerned and the person conducting or chairing the accelerated misconduct hearing of the date, time and place of that hearing, and

(b) notify the officer concerned of the effect of regulation 8(1) to (3) in relation to an accelerated misconduct hearing.

(1A) Where—

(a) the officer concerned raises an objection under regulation 51(2C) or (2K); and

(b) that objection is upheld,

the appropriate authority must specify a date to replace that specified under paragraph (1), which must be not less than 10 and not more than 15 working days after the date on which the person in respect of whom the objection was made is replaced.

(2) Where the Director General has made a decision under regulation 24(1) to present a case or is entitled to attend the accelerated misconduct hearing to make representations under regulation 58(1), the appropriate authority must notify the Director General of the date, time and place of the hearing.

Public notification of accelerated misconduct hearing

53

(1) The person conducting or chairing an accelerated misconduct hearing may require the appropriate authority to give notice of the hearing which contains information relating to one or more of—

(a) the name of the officer concerned;

(b) the date of the hearing;

(d) the place at which the hearing will take place, and

(e) the conduct that is the subject matter of the case and how that conduct is alleged to amount to gross misconduct, as set out in the notice given in accordance with regulation 51(2).

(2) Where the person conducting or chairing the accelerated misconduct hearing requires notice to be given in accordance with paragraph (1), the appropriate authority must publish the notice on its website as soon as practicable after notice of the hearing is given under regulation 52(1).

(3) Any person to whom this paragraph applies may make written representations to the person conducting or chairing the accelerated misconduct hearing in relation to—

(a) whether, and (if so) the extent to which, the person conducting or chairing the accelerated misconduct hearing should exclude any person from the whole or part of the hearing under regulation 59(2)(a);

(b) whether the person conducting or chairing the accelerated misconduct hearing should impose any conditions under regulation 59(2)(b);

(c) whether the person conducting or chairing the accelerated misconduct hearing should give directions prohibiting the publication of any matter relating to the proceedings under regulation 59(2)(c);

(d) in the light of the representations made under sub-paragraphs (a) to (c)—

(i) whether the person conducting or chairing the accelerated misconduct hearing should require notice to be given under paragraph (1);

(ii) which types of information mentioned in paragraph (1)(a) to (e) should be included in any such notice.

(4) Paragraph (3) applies to—

(a) the officer concerned;

(b) the appropriate authority;

(d) any interested person, and

(e) the Director General.

(5) Written representations, in relation to the matters specified in paragraph (3)(a) to (c), may also be made by any representative of the media to the person conducting or chairing the accelerated misconduct hearing.

(6) Any written representations made in accordance with paragraph (3) or (5), as the case may be, must be provided no later than the date specified by the person conducting or chairing the accelerated misconduct hearing for provision of such representations.

Procedure on receipt of notice

54

(1) Before the end of 7 working days beginning with the first working day after the written notice is given to the officer concerned under regulation 51(1), the officer concerned must give the appropriate authority—

(a) written notice of whether or not they accept that their conduct amounts to gross misconduct;

(b) where they accept that their conduct amounts to gross misconduct, any written submission they wish to make in mitigation;

(i) the allegations they dispute and their account of the relevant events, and

(ii) any arguments on points of law they wish to be considered by the person or persons conducting the accelerated misconduct hearing;

(d) a copy of any document they intend to rely on at the accelerated misconduct hearing.

(2) Where the Director General has made a decision under regulation 24(1) to present a case, the officer concerned must provide the Director General with a copy of the documents they have provided in accordance with paragraph (1).

Persons conducting accelerated misconduct hearing

55

(1) Where the officer concerned is an officer other than a senior officer, the accelerated misconduct hearing must be conducted by the chief officer of police of the police force concerned (but see regulation 2(4A)).

(2) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

(3) Where the officer concerned is a senior officer, the accelerated misconduct hearing must be conducted by a panel of persons specified in paragraph (4) ....

(4) Those persons are—

(a) a chair, who must be—

(i) where the officer is a chief officer of police, a Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis, a Deputy Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis or an Assistant Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis, HMCIC or an inspector of constabulary nominated by HMCIC, appointed by the local policing body; or

(ii) in every other case, a more senior officer than the officer concerned from a force other than the force concerned, appointed by the appropriate authority;

(aa) a person selected in accordance with regulation 28(4)(b); and

(b) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

(4A) A legally qualified person is to be appointed by the local policing body as an adviser to the chair and the panel of persons specified in paragraph (4), to be selected in accordance with regulation 28(5B).

(4B) The legally qualified person appointed under paragraph (4A) must provide advice to the panel of persons conducting or to the person chairing an accelerated misconduct hearing on request by the chair in respect of any legal or procedural matters relating to the accelerated misconduct hearing.

(4C) The panel of persons conducting or the person chairing an accelerated misconduct hearing must have regard to any advice given by the legally qualified person in accordance with paragraph (4B).

(4D) Paragraph (4E) 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).

(4E) Where this paragraph applies, the Director General may, within five working days beginning with the day after the day on which the Director General makes the determination referred to in paragraph (4D)(a) or the recommendation referred to in paragraph (4D)(b), make written representations to the chief officer of police who is to chair the accelerated misconduct hearing under paragraph (1) as to whether the chief officer of police should delegate responsibility for chairing the accelerated misconduct hearing to a person from a police force other than the police force concerned.

(4F) The chief officer of police to whom representations have been made under paragraph (4E) must—

(a) have regard to those representations; and

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

(5) 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 an accelerated misconduct hearing is prescribed as “the panel”.

Documents to be supplied

56

(1) Prior to the accelerated misconduct hearing the appropriate authority must supply the person conducting or chairing the accelerated misconduct hearing with a copy of—

(a) the notice given to the officer concerned under regulation 51(1);

(b) the other documents given to the officer under regulation 51(1);

(i) regulation 54, and

(ii) where paragraph (2) applies, regulation 31(2) and (3);

(d) where the officer concerned does not accept that the officer's conduct amounts to gross misconduct, any other documents that, in the opinion of the appropriate authority, should be considered at the hearing.

(2) This paragraph applies in a case where misconduct proceedings have been delayed by virtue of regulation 10(3) and the appropriate authority has certified the case as one where the special conditions are satisfied following a determination made under regulation 49(3).

(3) Prior to the accelerated misconduct hearing, the appropriate authority must provide the officer concerned with—

(a) a list of the documents supplied under paragraph (1), and

(b) a copy of any such document, where it has not already been supplied.

(4) Where the Director General has made a decision under regulation 24(1) to present a case, the duty specified in paragraph (1) to supply the specified documents to the person conducting or chairing the accelerated misconduct hearing lies with the Director General and not with the appropriate authority.

Attendance of officer concerned at accelerated misconduct hearing

57

(1) Subject to paragraph (2), the officer concerned must attend the accelerated misconduct hearing.

(2) Where the officer concerned informs the person conducting or chairing the accelerated misconduct hearing in advance that the officer is unable to attend on grounds which the person conducting or chairing the hearing considers reasonable, that person may allow the officer to participate in the hearing by video link or other means.

(3) Where under paragraph (2) the officer concerned is allowed to and does so participate in the accelerated misconduct hearing, or where the officer otherwise does not attend the accelerated misconduct hearing—

(a) the officer may nonetheless be represented at that hearing by—

(i) a police friend, or

(ii) a relevant lawyer (in which case the police friend may also attend), and

(b) the hearing may be proceeded with and concluded in the absence of the officer whether or not the officer is so represented.

(4) Where the officer concerned is represented in accordance with paragraph (3), the police friend or relevant lawyer of the officer, or both, as the case may be, may participate using the video link or other means where such means are also used by the officer.

Participation of Director General and investigator at accelerated misconduct hearing

58

(1) Subject to paragraph (5), in any case where—

(a) paragraph 18 or 19 of Schedule 3 to the 2002 Act (directed and independent investigations) applied, or

(b) paragraph 16 of Schedule 3 to the 2002 Act (investigations by the appropriate authority on its own behalf) applied and 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 27(4)(a) of that Schedule (duties with respect to disciplinary proceedings),

the Director General may attend the accelerated misconduct hearing to make representations.

(2) Where the Director General so attends the accelerated misconduct hearing—

(a) the Director General may be represented by a relevant lawyer;

(b) the Director General must notify the complainant or any interested person prior to the hearing, and

(c) the person conducting or chairing the accelerated misconduct hearing must notify the officer concerned prior to the hearing.

(3) The investigator or a nominated person must attend the accelerated misconduct hearing on the request of the person conducting or chairing the hearing to answer questions.

(4) For the purposes of this regulation, a “nominated person” is a person who, in the opinion of—

(a) the appropriate authority, or

(b) in a case to which paragraph 18 or 19 of Schedule 3 to the 2002 Act (directed and independent investigations) applied, the Director General,

has sufficient knowledge of the investigation of the case to be able to assist the person conducting or chairing the accelerated misconduct hearing.

(5) Paragraph (1) does not apply in a case where the Director General has made a decision under regulation 24(1) to present a case.

Reporting restrictions and participation at accelerated misconduct hearing

59

(1) Subject to paragraph (2), an accelerated misconduct hearing must be in public.

(2) Having considered any representations received under regulation 53(3) and (5), the person conducting or chairing the accelerated misconduct hearing may—

(a) in relation to the attendance at the hearing of a person under this regulation, exclude any person as they see fit from the whole or a part of it;

(b) impose such conditions as they see fit relating to the attendance under this regulation of any person at the hearing in order to facilitate the proper conduct of it, and

(3) Where the person conducting or chairing the accelerated misconduct hearing excludes a person under paragraph (2)(a) which has the effect of excluding a representative of the media, or gives a direction under paragraph (2)(c), any representative of the media may make representations to the person conducting or chairing the accelerated misconduct hearing about the exclusion or, as the case may be, direction.

(4) Where the person conducting or chairing an accelerated misconduct hearing exercises their power under paragraph (2) to exclude any person from all or part of the hearing, impose conditions that have the effect of excluding any person from all or part of the hearing or prohibit the publication of any matter relating to the hearing, the person must give written reasons to the local policing body for taking such action.

Notice to complainant and interested persons of accelerated misconduct hearing

60

(1) This regulation applies in the case of an accelerated misconduct hearing arising from the investigation of a—

(a) conduct matter under Schedule 3 to the 2002 Act (handling of complaints and conduct matters etc.), or

(b) complaint to which paragraph 19A of that Schedule (special procedure where investigation relates to police officer or special constable) applied.

(2) The appropriate authority must notify the complainant and any interested person of the date, time and place of the accelerated misconduct hearing and of their right to make representations under regulation 53(3).

Procedure at accelerated misconduct hearing

61

(1) The person conducting or chairing the accelerated misconduct hearing must determine the procedure at the hearing and, in so far as it is set out in these Regulations, must determine it in accordance with these Regulations.

(2) The accelerated misconduct hearing must not proceed unless the officer concerned has been notified of the effect of regulation 8(1) to (3) in relation to an accelerated misconduct hearing.

(3) Subject to paragraph (4), the person conducting or chairing the accelerated misconduct hearing may from time to time adjourn the hearing if it appears to the person to be necessary or expedient to do so.

(4) The accelerated misconduct hearing must not, except in exceptional circumstances, be adjourned solely to allow the complainant or any interested person to attend.

(5) At the beginning of the accelerated misconduct hearing, the person conducting or chairing the accelerated misconduct hearing must give the officer the opportunity to say whether or not the officer accepts that the officer's conduct amounts to gross misconduct.

(6) No witnesses other than the officer concerned may give evidence at the accelerated misconduct hearing and the person conducting or chairing the accelerated misconduct hearing must determine whether and by whom the officer concerned can be questioned.

(7) The person representing the appropriate authority may—

(a) address the hearing in order to do any or all of the following—

(i) put the case of the authority;

(ii) sum up that case;

(iii) respond on behalf of the authority to any view expressed at the accelerated misconduct hearing, and

(iv) make representations concerning any aspect of proceedings under these Regulations, and

(b) confer with the authority.

(8) The person representing the officer concerned may—

(a) address the hearing in order to do any or all of the following—

(i) put the case of the officer;

(ii) sum up that case;

(iii) respond on behalf of the officer to any view expressed at the accelerated misconduct hearing, and

(iv) make representations concerning any aspect of proceedings under these Regulations, and

(b) if the officer concerned is present at the accelerated misconduct hearing or is participating in it by video link or other means in accordance with regulation 57(2), confer with the officer.

(9) Where the person representing the officer concerned is a relevant lawyer, the police friend of the officer may also confer with the officer in the circumstances mentioned in paragraph (8)(b).

(10) The police friend or relevant lawyer of the officer concerned may not answer any questions asked of the officer during the accelerated misconduct hearing.

(11) The person conducting or chairing the accelerated misconduct hearing may allow any document to be considered at the hearing notwithstanding that a copy of it has not been supplied—

(a) by the officer concerned to the appropriate authority in accordance with regulation 54, or

(b) to the officer in accordance with regulation 51(1).

(12) Where evidence is given or considered at the accelerated misconduct hearing that the officer concerned—

(a) on being questioned by an investigator, at any time after the officer was given written notice under regulation 17(1) of these Regulations or regulation 17(1) of the Complaints and Misconduct Regulations, or

(b) in submitting any information or by not submitting any information at all under regulation 54 (or, where paragraph 14 applies, regulation 18(1) or 31(2) or (3)) of these Regulations or under regulation 20 of the Complaints and Misconduct Regulations,

failed to mention, any fact relied on in the officer's case at the accelerated misconduct hearing, being a fact which in the circumstances existing at the time, the officer could reasonably have been expected to mention when so questioned or when providing such information, paragraph (13) applies.

(13) Where this paragraph applies, the person conducting or chairing the accelerated misconduct hearing may draw such inferences from the failure as appear proper.

(14) This paragraph applies where the case was certified as one where the special conditions are satisfied following a determination made under regulation 49(3), being a case where misconduct proceedings have been delayed by virtue of regulation 10(3).

(14A) The advice provided by the legally qualified person under regulation 55(4B) must be given to all parties to the accelerated misconduct hearing.

(14B) In paragraph (14A) “parties” means the panel of persons appointed in accordance with regulation 55(4), the appropriate authority or, as the case may be, the originating authority, the officer concerned, the representatives of the officer and, where the Director General is presenting the case, the Director General.

(15) The person conducting or chairing the accelerated misconduct hearing must review the facts of the case and decide whether or not the conduct of the officer concerned amounts to gross misconduct.

(16) The person conducting or chairing the accelerated misconduct hearing must not find that the conduct of the officer concerned amounts to gross misconduct unless—

(a) they are satisfied on the balance of probabilities that this is the case, or

(b) the officer admits it is the case.

(17) At an accelerated misconduct hearing conducted by a panel, any decision must be based on a majority but must not indicate whether it was taken unanimously or by a majority.

(18) Where the Director General has made a decision under regulation 24(1) to present a case, paragraph (7) must be read as if for “The person representing the appropriate authority” there were substituted “ The Director General ”.

Outcome of accelerated misconduct hearing

62

(1) Where the person or persons conducting the accelerated misconduct hearing find that the conduct of the officer concerned amounts to gross misconduct, they must impose disciplinary action, which, subject to the provisions of this regulation, must be—

(a) dismissal without notice, or

(b) if the person or persons conducting the accelerated misconduct hearing are satisfied that there are exceptional circumstances which justify it—

(i) a final written warning, or

(ii) reduction in rank.

(2) The disciplinary action has effect from the date on which it is notified to the officer concerned.

(3) Where, on the date of the severity assessment under regulation 14(1) of these Regulations or under regulation 16 of the Complaints and Misconduct Regulations, the officer concerned had a final written warning in force, a final written warning must not be given.

(4) Where a final written warning is given, that warning remains in force for—

(a) a period of 2 years beginning with the day on which it was notified to the officer concerned, or

(b) such longer period as the person or persons considering the question of disciplinary action may determine, up to a maximum of 5 years from the day on which it was notified to the officer.

(5) The reference to a period in paragraph (4)(a) and (b) does not include any time when the officer concerned is taking a career break (under regulation 33(12) of the Police Regulations (leave) and the determination of the Secretary of State made under that regulation).

(6) Reduction in rank may only be imposed under this regulation where the person or persons imposing the disciplinary action consider this is an appropriate sanction, taking into account the views of the appropriate authority, including in relation to the likely operational impact.

(7) Where, on the date of the severity assessment under regulation 14(1) of these Regulations or under regulation 16 of the Complaints and Misconduct Regulations, the officer concerned had been reduced in rank under the Police (Conduct) Regulations 2004 or under these Regulations, a reduction in rank may not be imposed.

(8) Where the person or persons conducting the accelerated misconduct hearing find that the conduct of the officer concerned does not amount to gross misconduct, they may—

(a) dismiss the case, or

(b) return the case to the appropriate authority to deal with in accordance with Part 4.

(9) Where the case is returned to the appropriate authority under paragraph (8)(b), the appropriate authority must proceed in accordance with Part 4, subject to regulation 23(1) being read as if the words “Subject to regulation 49, on receipt of the investigator's report under regulation 21(1),” were omitted.

(10) Where the question of disciplinary action is being considered, the person or persons considering it—

(a) must have regard to the record of police service of the officer concerned as shown on the officer's personal record;

(b) may consider such documentary evidence as would, in their opinion, assist them in determining the question;

(i) the officer;

(ii) if the officer is legally represented, the officer's relevant lawyer or, where the officer is not legally represented, the officer's police friend;

(iii) the appropriate authority or the person appointed to represent such authority in accordance with regulation 8(5), and

(iv) the Director General or the Director General's relevant lawyer, where the Director General presented the case on behalf of the appropriate authority,

an opportunity to make oral or written representations before any such question is determined, including on the appropriate level of disciplinary action, and

(d) where representations are received in relation to mitigating circumstances—

(i) must consider whether those circumstances have been mentioned at an earlier stage in the proceedings and, if they have not been so mentioned, whether the officer could reasonably have been expected to so mention them, and

(ii) in the light of their conclusions under paragraph (i), may determine that it is appropriate to place less weight on those circumstances.

(11) Paragraph (12) applies where an officer is dismissed at an accelerated misconduct hearing.

(12) The person or persons conducting the accelerated misconduct hearing must provide any information to the appropriate authority that the person or persons consider ought to be included by virtue of regulation 3(2)(l) of the Police Barred List and Police Advisory List Regulations 2017 in the barred list report relating to the officer concerned (information relating to whether exemptions to requirement to publish the barred list entry apply).

Notification of outcome

63

(1) Subject to paragraph (1B), the person conducting or chairing the accelerated misconduct hearing must, before the end of a period of 5 working days beginning with the first working day after the completion of the accelerated misconduct hearing, submit a report to the appropriate authority, setting out—

(a) the finding of the person or persons conducting the accelerated misconduct hearing;

(b) the reasons for that finding;

(d) where it was found that the conduct of the officer concerned amounted to gross misconduct but the disciplinary action imposed was not dismissal without notice, the reasons for that decision.

(1A) The person chairing the accelerated misconduct hearing under regulation 55(4) may require the legally qualified person appointed under regulation 55(4A) to provide advice in respect of legal and procedural issues relating to the report under paragraph (1).

(1B) The person chairing the accelerated misconduct hearing under regulation 55(4) may delegate responsibility for preparing the report under paragraph (1) to the legally qualified person appointed under regulation 55(4A).

(1C) Where the person chairing the accelerated misconduct hearing under regulation 55(4) delegates responsibility for preparing the report under paragraph (1B)—

(a) the legally qualified person must submit the report to the person chairing the accelerated misconduct hearing within five working days beginning with the first working day after completion of the accelerated misconduct hearing;

(b) the person chairing the accelerated misconduct hearing—

(i) may amend the report prepared by the legally qualified person; and

(ii) must satisfy themselves that they are content with the report prepared by the legally qualified person (whether or not they have amended it under paragraph (i)).

(1D) Where the person chairing an accelerated misconduct hearing delegates responsibility for preparing the report under paragraph (1B), paragraph (1) is to be read as if for “five working days” there were substituted “10 working days”.

(2) A report under this regulation must include notice of the right of appeal to a police appeals tribunal.

(3) The appropriate authority must, as soon as practicable after receiving the report under paragraph (1), notify the officer concerned of the outcome by sending the officer a copy of that report.

(4) The appropriate authority must send a copy of any report under this regulation to—

(a) the Director General, in any case where the Director General—

(i) presented the case, or

(ii) was entitled to attend to make representations under regulation 58(1), ...

(b) the complainant and any interested person, in any case to which regulation 60 applies, and

(c) where the person conducting the accelerated misconduct hearing found that the conduct of the officer concerned amounted to gross misconduct but the disciplinary action imposed was not dismissal without notice, the local policing body.

(5) Subject to the harm test and paragraph (9), the person conducting or chairing the accelerated misconduct hearing must require the appropriate authority to publish the report submitted under paragraph (1).

(6) Where the appropriate authority is required to publish the report in accordance with paragraph (5), it must do so as soon as practicable after the officer concerned is notified of the outcome of the accelerated misconduct hearing under paragraph (3).

(7) Where the appropriate authority publishes a report in accordance with paragraph (5), it must publish the notice on its website for a period of not less than 28 days.

(8) Prior to publication of a report under paragraph (5) the appropriate authority may, subject to paragraph (11), redact the document—

(a) in so far as the authority considers redaction is—

(i) 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;

(ii) necessary in the interests of national security;

(iii) necessary for the purpose of the prevention or detection of crime, or the apprehension or prosecution of offenders;

(iv) 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;

(v) necessary and proportionate for the protection of the welfare and safety of any informant or witness;

(vi) otherwise in the public interest, and

(b) in line with any restrictions imposed on the disclosure of information during the course of the proceedings.

(9) The person conducting or chairing the accelerated misconduct hearing may dispense with the requirement under paragraph (5) to publish the report if in the particular circumstances of the case the person considers it is appropriate to do so on any of the grounds set out in paragraph (8)(a) or (b).

(10) In making a decision under paragraph (9), the person conducting or chairing the accelerated misconduct hearing may have regard to any representations—

(a) provided under regulation 53(3) or (5), or

(b) made at the accelerated misconduct hearing.

(11) Information that has already been published during the course of the proceedings may not be redacted under paragraph (8).

Record of accelerated misconduct hearing

64

(1) A verbatim record of the proceedings at the accelerated misconduct hearing must be taken.

(2) The officer concerned must, on request, be supplied with a copy of the record of the proceedings at the accelerated misconduct hearing.

PART 6 — Reflective practice review process

Interpretation and application

65

(1) In this Part—

“participating officer” means the police officer whose actions or behaviour are subject to the reflective practice review process, and

“reviewer” means the person who is conducting the reflective practice review process.

(2) The reviewer must be—

(a) the line manager of the participating officer;

(b) another officer who is senior to the participating officer, or

(c) a police staff member who, in the opinion of the appropriate authority, is more senior than the participating officer.

(3) This Part applies where a matter has been referred to be dealt with under the reflective practice review process—

(a) under these Regulations, or

(b) following—

(i) a determination under paragraph 6(2A) of Schedule 3 to the 2002 Act (handling of complaints by the appropriate authority) ;

(ii) a determination under paragraph 23(5A)(c) of Schedule 3 to the 2002 Act (action by the Director General in response to an investigation report under paragraph 22) ;

(iii) a determination under paragraph 24(6) of Schedule 3 to the 2002 Act (action by the appropriate authority in response to an investigation report under paragraph 22) ;

(iv) a recommendation under paragraph 28ZA of Schedule 3 to the 2002 Act (recommendations by the Director General or a local policing body) .

General

66

(1) Where a matter is dealt with under this Part, regulation 7(2)(b) to (d) does not apply.

(2) Where more than one officer is involved in a matter that has been referred to be dealt with under the reflective practice review process, a joint reflective practice review discussion may take place, provided that individual reflective review development reports are produced.

(3) A participating officer must not be prevented from applying for or obtaining a promotion by reason of the officer's participation in the reflective practice review process.

(4) Any account given by the participating officer under regulation 67(1)(b) or during the reflective practice review discussion held under regulation 69 is not admissible in any subsequent disciplinary proceedings brought against the participating officer, except to the extent that it consists of an admission relating to a matter that has not been referred to be dealt with under the reflective practice review process.

Referral to reflective practice review process

67

(1) Where a matter is referred to the reflective practice review process, the reviewer must as soon as practicable provide the following to the participating officer—

(a) details of the matter that has been referred and the circumstances that are being considered, and

(b) an invitation to provide an account of the matter that has been referred for review.

(2) The participating officer must provide any account under paragraph (1)(b) within 5 working days beginning with the first working day after the day on which the invitation to do so is received, unless a longer period is agreed with the reviewer.

(3) The reflective practice review process consists of a fact-finding stage and a discussion stage, followed by the production of a reflective review development report.

Fact-finding stage

68

(1) Enquiries made by the reviewer during the fact-finding stage must be reasonable, proportionate and relevant to the purpose, which is to establish the facts of the matter subject to the review process.

(2) Paragraphs (3) and (4) apply to a matter that has been referred under these Regulations to be dealt with under the reflective practice review process.

(3) If at any time during the fact-finding stage substantial evidence becomes available to the reviewer, which was not available to the appropriate authority when the matter was referred to be dealt with under the reflective practice review process, the reviewer must refer the matter to the appropriate authority for a further assessment under regulation 14.

(4) Where a matter is so referred for a further assessment, unless such further assessment is that the conduct, if proved, would amount to practice requiring improvement, the reflective practice review process must not be continued.

Discussion stage

69

(1) The reviewer must, following completion of the fact-finding stage, invite the participating officer to attend a reflective practice review discussion.

(2) Such discussion should take place as soon as reasonably practicable.

(3) The discussion must include, in particular—

(a) a discussion of the practice requiring improvement and related circumstances that have been identified, and

(b) the identification of key lessons to be learnt by the participating officer, line management or police force concerned, to address the matter and prevent a reoccurrence of the matter.

Reflective review development report

70

(1) The reviewer must, following completion of the discussion stage, produce a reflective review development report.

(2) A reflective review development report must contain—

(a) a summary of the issue and any relevant background circumstances;

(b) a summary of the reflective practice review discussion;

(d) any lessons identified for the participating officer;

(e) any lessons identified for the line management or police force concerned;

(f) a specified period of time for reviewing the report and the actions taken.

(3) The reviewer must send a copy of the report to the appropriate authority.

(4) The appropriate authority must take appropriate action to ensure that any lessons identified for the line management or police force concerned are addressed.

(5) A copy of the report, together with a note of the review of the report and of actions taken, must be retained.

(6) The report and review notes must be discussed as part of the participating officer's performance and development review during the 12 month period following agreement of the report.

Failure to engage with the reflective practice review process

71

If the reviewer considers that the participating officer is failing to engage with the reflective practice review process, the reviewer may refer that failure for assessment by the appropriate authority under regulation 14.

Part 7 — Amendment of the Special Constables Regulations 1965 and the Police Barred List and Police Advisory List Regulations 2017

Amendment of the Special Constables Regulations 1965

72

(1) The Special Constables Regulations 1965 are amended as follows.

(2) In regulation 3(1) (retirement), omit “: Provided that a special constable may not, without the consent of the chief constable, give notice for the purposes of this Regulation, or retire in pursuance of a notice previously given, while suspended under these Regulations”.

Amendment of the Police Barred List and Police Advisory List Regulations 2017

73

(1) The Police Barred List and Police Advisory List Regulations 2017 are amended as follows.

(2) In regulations 2(1) (interpretation), in the definition of “Standards of Professional Behaviour”, and 10(1)(a) (publication of information in barred list), for “2012” substitute “ 2020 ”.

SCHEDULE 1 — Modifications to these Regulations in their application to former officers

Modification to regulation 2 (interpretation and delegation)

1

Regulation 2 is to be read as if—

(a) in paragraph (1)—

(i) the following definitions were inserted in the appropriate places—

“Condition C person” means a person in relation to whom regulation 4(2)(a) and (5)(a) and (b) is satisfied;

“Condition C special determination” has the meaning given in regulation 4A(2);

“disciplinary action for gross misconduct” means a finding that the officer concerned would have been dismissed if the officer had not ceased to be a member of a police force or a special constable;

“relevant time” means the time immediately before the officer concerned ceased to be a member of a police force or a special constable;

(ii) the definitions of “the Performance Regulations”, “appeal meeting”, “disciplinary action”, “human resources professional”, “line manager”, “misconduct meeting”, “practice requiring improvement” and “reflective practice review process” were omitted;

(iia) for the definition of “accelerated misconduct hearing”, there were substituted—

“accelerated misconduct hearing” means a hearing to which an officer may be referred under regulation 21D(7) or 49(4) to determine whether the conduct of the officer amounts to gross misconduct and, if so, what disciplinary action should be imposed;

(iii) in the definition of “allegation”, for “, conduct matter or practice requiring improvement” there were substituted “ or conduct matter ”;

(iv) for the definition of “appropriate authority”, there were substituted—

“appropriate authority” means, subject to regulation 26(3), where the officer concerned was— (a) the chief officer or acting chief officer of any police force at the relevant time, the local policing body for the force's area; (b) any other police officer at the relevant time, the chief officer of police of the police force concerned;

(v) in the definition of “gross misconduct”, for “as to justify dismissal” there were substituted “ that the officer concerned would have been dismissed if the officer had not ceased to be a member of a police force or a special constable ”;

(vi) in the definition of “gross misconduct”, for “as to justify dismissal” there were substituted “ that the officer concerned would have been dismissed if the officer had not ceased to be a member of a police force or a special constable ”;

(vii) in the definition of “misconduct”—

(aa) “, other than in regulation 23(2)(a) and the first reference to “misconduct” in regulation 23(2)(b),” were omitted;

(bb) for “so serious as to justify disciplinary action” there were substituted “ not so serious that the officer concerned would have been dismissed if the officer had not ceased to be a member of a police force or a special constable ”;

(viii) for the definition of “misconduct hearing”, except in its application to regulation 21A(1)(d), there were substituted—

“misconduct hearing” means a hearing to which an officer may be referred under regulation 21D(3) or (6), 21E(5)(a) or 23(9)(a) to determine whether the conduct of the officer amounts to gross misconduct and, if so, what disciplinary action should be imposed;

(ix) for the definition of “misconduct proceedings”, there were substituted—

“misconduct proceedings” means a misconduct hearing;

(x) for the definition of “police force concerned”, there were substituted—

“police force concerned” means— (a) the police force of which the officer concerned was a member at the relevant time, or (b) where the officer concerned was a special constable at the relevant time, the police force maintained for the police area for which the officer was appointed at that time;

(i) for the definition of “police officer”, except in its application to regulations 4, 7 and 8, there were substituted—

“police officer” and “officer” mean a person who has ceased to be a member of a police force or a special constable;

(ii) in the definition of “proposed witness”, “conducting or” were omitted;

(iii) for the definition of “staff association”, there were substituted—

“staff association” means— (a) in relation to an officer who was a member of a police force of the rank of chief inspector or below at the relevant time, the Police Federation of England and Wales; (b) in relation to an officer who was a member of a police force of the rank of superintendent or chief superintendent at the relevant time, the Police Superintendents' Association, and (c) in relation to an officer who was a senior officer at the relevant time, the Chief Police Officers' Staff Association;

(b) for paragraph (4), there were substituted—

(4) Where the appropriate authority delegates its functions under regulation 49, a decision under that regulation as to whether to certify a case as one where the special conditions are satisfied must be authorised by a senior officer;

Modification: insertion of Part 1A

2

These Regulations apply as if after regulation 4, there were inserted—

(4A) (1) This Part applies where the Director General is required under paragraph 23(5A)(ba) of Schedule 3 to the 2002 Act (as applied with modifications by regulation 42 of, and Schedule 2 to, the Complaints and Misconduct Regulations) to make a Condition C special determination. (2) A Condition C special determination is a determination by the Director General as to whether the taking of disciplinary proceedings against a Condition C person in respect of alleged gross misconduct would be reasonable and proportionate having regard to— (a) the seriousness of the alleged gross misconduct; (b) the impact of the allegation on public confidence in the police, and (c) the public interest. (3) When assessing the seriousness of the alleged gross misconduct for the purposes of paragraph (2)(a), the matters which the Director General must take into account are— (a) whether it appears that the alleged gross misconduct amounts to a criminal offence; (b) whether it appears that a complainant or other person has been harmed (whether physically or psychologically) by the alleged gross misconduct and, if so, the extent and seriousness of the harm; (c) where it appears that a complainant or other person has been so harmed, whether that person was a vulnerable person; (d) whether it appears that the alleged gross misconduct was intentional; (e) whether it appears that the purpose or one of the purposes of the alleged gross misconduct was personal gain or benefit for the officer concerned; (f) whether it appears that the alleged gross misconduct is aggravated by discriminatory behaviour on the grounds of a person's race, gender, disability, age, religion or belief, sexual orientation or gender identity; (g) whether it appears that the officer concerned acted with one or more other persons serving with the police within the meaning of section 12(7)(a) or (c) of the 2002 Act (member of a police force or special constable under the direction and control of a chief officer); (h) the extent to which the alleged gross misconduct involved abuse of a position of trust or authority held by the officer concerned; (i) whether it appears that the officer concerned has taken steps to prevent the alleged gross misconduct being identified or to obstruct investigations into it, other than lawful steps in the officer's defence; (j) whether it appears that the alleged gross misconduct has had an adverse effect on community relations; (k) whether it appears that there are mitigating circumstances arising out of the health (whether physical or mental) of the officer concerned at the time of the alleged gross misconduct, and (l) any other matters that the Director General considers relevant. (4) When assessing the impact of the allegation on public confidence in the police for the purposes of paragraph (2)(b), the matters which the Director General must take into account are— (a) whether it appears that the alleged gross misconduct has had an effect on relations between the public and the police, including relations between the members of the community where the alleged gross misconduct occurred and the police force concerned; (b) the extent of any apparent harm to public confidence in the police, and, in particular, in the police force concerned; (c) the effect that a decision not to take disciplinary proceedings might have on public confidence in the police, and (d) any other matters that the Director General considers relevant. (5) When assessing the public interest for the purposes of paragraph (2)(c), the matters which the Director General must take into account are— (a) whether it appears that the officer concerned should be prevented from future employment or appointment by a person mentioned in section 88C(5) of the 1996 Act (effect of inclusion in police barred list: persons who may not employ or otherwise appoint a barred person) ; (b) where it appears that the officer concerned should be so prevented, whether disciplinary proceedings are necessary for this purpose; (c) the length of time since the alleged gross misconduct occurred; (d) whether it appears that the officer concerned will be held to account in respect of the alleged gross misconduct through other means, such as criminal or other proceedings; (e) where it appears that a complainant or other person has been harmed (whether physically or psychologically) by the alleged gross misconduct, whether it appears that a decision not to take disciplinary proceedings would adversely affect that person; (f) whether it appears that the officer concerned is unfit to be subject to or to participate in disciplinary proceedings by reason of disability or ill-health, and (g) any other matters that the Director General considers relevant. (6) In paragraph (3)(c), “vulnerable person” means a person who, by reason of age, disability or ill-health, is, or may be, unable to— (a) take care of themselves, or (b) protect themselves against harm or exploitation. (4B) (1) Before making a Condition C special determination the Director General must give a notification in writing to— (a) any complainant; (b) any interested person, and (c) the officer concerned. (2) A notification under paragraph (1) must— (a) state that the Director General is to make a Condition C special determination and the consequences under Schedule 3 to the 2002 Act of such a determination; (b) explain the effect of regulation 4A; (c) explain that— (i) if disciplinary proceedings are taken and the allegation of gross misconduct is proved, the officer concerned may be subject to a finding that the officer would have been dismissed if the officer had not ceased to be a member of a police force or a special constable, and (ii) if the officer concerned is subject to such a finding, the officer will be included in the police barred list; (d) subject to the harm test, set out any findings relating to the conduct to which the investigation relates in any investigation report submitted to the Director General under Schedule 3 to the 2002 Act; (e) set out the person's rights under paragraph (3); (f) in the case of the officer concerned, state that the officer has the right to seek advice from the officer's staff association or any other body and the effect of regulation 7(1) and (2). (3) A person given a notification under paragraph (1) may, within the period of 21 days beginning with the day on which the notice is given or such longer period as the Director General may agree with that person, provide a written statement and any document which the person wishes the Director General to take into account for the purposes of the Condition C special determination. (4) Before making a Condition C special determination the Director General may consult any other person the Director General thinks fit. (5) When making a Condition C special determination the Director General must take into account in addition to the matters specified in regulation 4A— (a) any written statement or document provided under paragraph (3); (b) any response to a consultation carried out under paragraph (4); (c) any findings relating to the conduct to which the investigation relates in any investigation report submitted to the Director General under Schedule 3 to the 2002 Act, and (d) any other relevant evidence. (6) The Director General must give notification in writing of a Condition C special determination and the consequences under Schedule 3 to the 2002 Act of the determination to the persons mentioned in paragraph (1).

Modification to regulation 7 (police friend)

3

Regulation 7 is to be read as if—

(a) in paragraph (1), for sub-paragraph (c), there were substituted—

(c) any other person nominated by the officer concerned and approved by the chief officer of the police force concerned,

(b) in paragraph (2)—

(i) “Subject to regulation 66(1),” were omitted;

(ii) in sub-paragraph (b), “or appeal meeting” were omitted;

(iii) in sub-paragraph (d), “, meeting” were omitted.

Modification to regulation 8 (legal and other representation)

4

Regulation 8 is to be read as if—

(a) in paragraph (3), for “the officer may be dismissed or”, there were substituted “ disciplinary action for gross misconduct may be imposed in relation to the officer or the officer may ”;

(b) in paragraph (4), “or an appeal meeting” were omitted;

(i) in the opening words, “or an appeal meeting” were omitted;

(ii) in sub-paragraph (b) “only,” and the words before it were omitted;

(d) in paragraph (6), “Subject to paragraph (7)”, “conducting or” and “or appeal meeting” were omitted;

(e) paragraph (7) were omitted.

Modification to regulation 9 (provision of notices or documents)

5

Regulation 9 is to be read as if—

(a) the existing text were paragraph (1);

(b) after paragraph (1), there were inserted—

(2) The appropriate authority must make reasonable enquiries in order to determine the last known address of the officer concerned for the purposes of paragraph (1)(b).

Modification: omission of regulation 11 (suspension)

6

These Regulations are to be read as if regulation 11 were omitted.

Modification to regulation 12 (record of disciplinary proceedings)

7

Regulation 12 is to be read as if for “and decision on disciplinary action”, there were substituted “ , any decision on disciplinary action for gross misconduct ”.

Modification to regulation 14 (severity assessment)

8

Regulation 14 is to be read as if—

(a) in paragraph (1)—

(i) at the beginning, there were inserted “Subject to paragraph (6A),”;

(ii) “misconduct or” and “or neither” were omitted;

(b) in paragraph (2), for the words from “amount”, in the first place that word occurs, to the end, there were substituted “ not amount to gross misconduct, it must take no further action. ”;

(d) in paragraph (5)—

(i) at the beginning, there were inserted “Subject to paragraph (6A),”;

(ii) for the words from “misconduct or” to the end, there were substituted “ gross misconduct, the matter must be investigated. ”;

(e) in paragraph (6), at the beginning, there were inserted “Subject to paragraph (6A),”;

(f) after paragraph (6), there were inserted—

(6A) The appropriate authority must take no action or no further action under paragraph (1), (5) or (6) if — (a) it is satisfied that the officer concerned is unfit for disciplinary proceedings to be brought against the officer by reason of disability or ill-health, or (b) the appropriate authority has made reasonable enquiries in order to determine the last known address of the officer but it has been unsuccessful.

(g) in paragraph (7), for the words from “or to refer” to the end, there were substituted “ or is required under paragraph (6A)(a) to take no action or no further action, it must so notify the officer concerned in writing as soon as practicable. ”.

Modification to regulation 15 (appointment of investigator)

9

Regulation 15 is to be read as if in paragraph (3)—

(a) for sub-paragraph (c), there were substituted—

(c) if they worked, directly or indirectly, under the management of the officer concerned at the relevant time

(b) in sub-paragraph (d)—

(i) for “is a senior officer, if they are”, there were substituted “ was a senior officer at the relevant time, if they were at that time ”;

(ii) in paragraph (ii), for “where the officer is a member of the metropolitan police force”, there were substituted “ , where the officer was a member of the metropolitan police force at the relevant time ”.

Modification to regulation 16 (investigation)

10

Regulation 16 is to be read as if “misconduct or”, in both places where those words appear, were omitted.

Modification to regulation 17 (written notices)

11

Regulation 17 is to be read as if in paragraph (1)—

(a) sub-paragraph (d) were omitted;

(b) for sub-paragraph (e), there were substituted—

(e) that if the allegation of gross misconduct is proved, the officer may be subject to a finding that the officer would have been dismissed if the officer had not ceased to be a member of a police force or a special constable; (ea) that if the officer is subject to such a finding, information including the officer's full name and a description of the conduct which would have led to the officer's dismissal will be added to the police barred list and may be subject to publication for a period of up to 5 years;

(ga) that it may harm the officer's case if the officer fails to attend an interview of which the officer has been given notice under regulation 20(6) (interviews during investigation), and

(d) in sub-paragraph (h), after “18(1)”, there were inserted “ , 20A(2) ”.

Modification to regulation 20 (interviews during investigation)

12

Regulation 20 is to be read as if—

(a) in paragraph (1), after “practicable” there were inserted “ and subject to regulation 20A ”;

(b) in paragraph (5), for the words from “must” to the end there were substituted “ must be reasonable. ”.

Modification: insertion of regulation 20A

13

These Regulations are to be read as if after regulation 20 there were inserted—

(20A) (1) Where the investigator is satisfied that, having regard to the circumstances of the officer concerned, it would be unreasonable to require the officer to attend an interview, the investigator may cause the officer concerned to be given a written notice of enquiry. (2) A notice of enquiry given under paragraph (1) must— (a) state any question the investigator wishes to ask the officer concerned, and (b) request a response to any such question from the officer concerned within a specified period. (3) The investigator must make a written record of any notice of enquiry and response received under this regulation.

Modification to regulation 21 (report of investigation)

14

Regulation 21 is to be read as if—

(a) in paragraph (2)—

(i) after sub-paragraph (b), “and” were inserted;

(ii) for sub-paragraphs (c) and (d) there were substituted—

(c) indicate the investigator's opinion as to whether— (i) there is a case to answer in respect of gross misconduct or there is no case to answer; (ii) where the investigator's opinion is that there is no such case to answer, there may nevertheless have been a breach of the Standards of Professional Behaviour that would have justified the bringing of disciplinary proceedings had the officer still been serving.

(b) in paragraph (4)—

(i) for “would amount to neither misconduct nor”, there were substituted “ would not amount to ”;

(ii) in sub-paragraph (a), for “it;” there were substituted “ it, and ”;

(iii) sub-paragraph (c), and “and” before it were omitted;

Modification to regulation 22 (general)

15

Regulation 22 is to be read as if “conducting or” were omitted.

Modification to regulation 23 (referral of case to misconduct proceedings)

16

Regulation 23 is to be read as if—

(a) paragraphs (1) to (8) were omitted, and

(b) paragraphs (10) to (12) were omitted.

Modification to regulation 25 (joint misconduct proceedings)

17

Regulation 25 is to be read as if—

(a) paragraph (2) were omitted;

(b) in paragraph (5), “conducting or” were omitted;

Modification to regulation 26 (delegation of functions)

18

Regulation 26 is to be read as if—

(a) in paragraph (1)(a), for “is” there were substituted “ was at the relevant time ”;

(b) in paragraph (3)(b), in the definition of “originating authority”, for “is” there were substituted “ was at the relevant time ”.

Modification to regulation 27 (withdrawal of misconduct proceedings)

19

Regulation 27 is to be read as if—

(a) in paragraph (1)(a), “misconduct or” were omitted;

(b) in paragraph (2)—

(i) in sub-paragraph (a), for the words from “may” to the end, there were substituted “ must take no further action against the officer concerned, ”;

(ii) in sub-paragraph (b)(i), “, indicating whether any action will be taken under paragraph (2)(a)” were omitted;

Modification to regulation 28 (persons conducting misconduct proceedings)

20

Regulation 28 is to be read as if—

(a) paragraphs (1) to (3) were omitted;

(b) in paragraph (4)—

(i) for “the panel of persons must comprise” there were substituted “ where the case is referred to a misconduct hearing, that hearing must be conducted by a panel of three persons, comprising ”;

(ii) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

(d) in paragraph (5), in the substitute sub-paragraph (a), after “officer concerned” there were inserted “was at the relevant time”;

(e) in paragraph (5A), for “the officer concerned is”, there were substituted “the officer concerned was at the relevant time”; and

(f) in paragraph (5E), for “is not a senior officer”, there were substituted “was not a senior officer at the relevant time”.

Modification to regulation 30 (notice of referral to misconduct proceedings)

21

Regulation 30 is to be read as if—

(a) in paragraph (1)—

(i) in sub-paragraph (a)—

(aa) in paragraph (ii), “misconduct or” and “, as the case may be” were omitted;

(bb) for the words form “conduct” to the end, there were substituted “chair the misconduct proceedings”;

(cc) in paragraph (vi), “in relation to the form of misconduct proceedings to which the case is being referred” were omitted;

(dd) after paragraph (vii), “and” were omitted;

(ee) after paragraph (viii), there were inserted—

(ix) the fact that the officer will be subject to disciplinary proceedings under these Regulations, and (x) the fact that, if the allegation of gross misconduct is proved, the officer may be subject to a finding that the officer would have been dismissed if the officer had not ceased to be a member of a police force or a special constable;

(ii) in sub-paragraph (c), after paragraph (i), “and” were omitted and there were inserted—

(ia) in the case of a Condition C person, any written statement or document provided to the Director General under regulation 4B(3) and any response to a consultation carried out under regulation 4B(4), and

(b) paragraph (2) were omitted;

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.