Disciplinary probes too intrusive, say top officers
SCOTLAND’S police chiefs have criticised the transparency around ‘intrusive’ disciplinary proceedings against senior officers.
The Scottish Chief Police Officers’ Staff Association (SCPOSA) has complained about the ‘significant publicity’ generated by misconduct probes.
The association, which represents Police Scotland’s chief constable, his assistant and his deputies, says the ‘protracted’ inquiries have caused ‘irreparable’ damage to senior officers’ reputations.
It comes after a number of high-profile investigations by the Police Investigations and Review Commissioner (PIRC) and the Scottish Police Authority (SPA). PIRC said it had been bombarded with ‘numerous allegations’ over a six-month period.
But in a submission to Holyrood’s justice committee, SCPOSA said: ‘The association have... become concerned regarding the practice of the PIRC and SPA to publish releases on their website at every stage of an inquiry into senior officers.
‘Sadly, the Press and indeed the regulatory agencies who are very quick to publicise the commencement of an inquiry are not so fast to publicise (its) conclusion and thus the reputational damage remains.’
The process for investigating allegations against senior officers was set out when Police Scotland was created in 2013. The committee is examining the impact of the legislation and has called for a review of the accountability of both the SPA and PIRC.
It comes after former chief constable Phil Gormley quit in February – five months after he had been placed on special leave amid investigations into claims of gross misconduct, which he denied. SCPOSA said he had ‘resigned before the resolution of the allegations against him despite inquiries having been ongoing for many months’.
The organisation, chaired by Assistant Chief Constable Bernard Higgins, said it ‘strongly defends the rights of senior officers to be dealt with timeously, sensitively and with a recognition of the high profile and relatively vulnerable position which they hold’.
Mr Higgins was suspended in November 2017 after allegations of misconduct – which he denies – were made against him. He returned to work in March and investigations continue.
SCPOSA said it had ‘become increasingly concerned regarding the length of time taken by the SPA and PIRC to complete inquiries’. It stated:
‘Vulnerable position’
‘In many of these cases months have passed with no apparent progress and indeed no explanation of why no progress has been made.’
The submission continued: ‘In a number of instances the association and individual officers have only become aware of investigations into their conduct when articles have appeared in the media.’
The PIRC said it had launched ‘numerous’ investigations into senior officers between July 2017 and January 2018, some relating to ‘potential criminality’.
A submission to the committee by the SPA backed SCPOSA’s calls, saying: ‘We are concerned that the substance, interpretation and application of the current arrangements provide insufficient confidentiality for those who make complaints and for those about whom complaints are made.’