Lawyers fear being sued over police misconduct trials
SENIOR lawyers are blocking police misconduct hearings because of the risk of being sued by officers for “unfavourable” decisions.
The lawyers in charge of the disciplinary panels are refusing to take on new cases until the Home Office guarantees them the same immunity from legal claims as other courts and tribunals.
It follows cases where decisions to dismiss officers for gross misconduct face legal challenges that could expose panel members to six-figure damages claims for which they will be liable.
The stand-off has already led to delays in hearings at a time when police discipline is under public scrutiny following scandals exposing misogyny, sexism and other misconduct.
The three-strong panels, chaired by a legal expert with a senior police officer and lay member, were set up in 2016 to hear serious cases of gross misconduct, where officers face dismissal.
They were designed to be more independent than the previous system, where senior officers presided over the disciplinary process, leading to misconduct allegations being “whitewashed” and brushed under the carpet.
John Bassett, president of the National Association of Legally Qualified Chairs of the panels (NALQC), said the risk of being sued undermined their ability to reach a decision “without fear or favour” and jeopardised the “very fairness of the system”.
“For months, we have been lobbying the Home Office to legislate to remove the risk to panellists of ruinous personal financial liability,” he said.
“Unless the Home Office does legislate, the police misconduct regime will cease to function as intended, something that is not in the public interest or in the interests of the police service or individual officers.”
The row has come to a head because of the case of a police officer who was dismissed for gross misconduct after he allegedly lied to a court.
He has sued his chief constable for discrimination, claiming his dismissal was “unfavourable” on the basis that he was suffering from a disability at the time in the form of severe stress.
The chief constable, Sarah Crew, of
Avon and Somerset police, is taking the case to the Supreme Court to establish that liability lies with the disciplinary panel, and not her.
The NALQC said that if successful, it would mean panellists would become personally liable for legal claims “unlike any other similar body”, paving the way for other dismissed officers to sue.
A Home Office spokesman said the chairs were indemnified and afforded common law immunity. He added it was “aware” of the NALQC’s concerns and was working with them to “consider their proposals carefully”.