Who are the Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC) and what is their role
The IPCC existed from 2004 with significant expansion from 2013 and became the IOPC in January 2018
Led by the Director General, the IPOC investigate the most serious and sensitive incidents and allegations involving the police in England and Wales, securing and maintaining public confidence in the complaints system.
Their mission is to improve policing by independent oversight of police complaints, holding police to account and ensuring learning leads to change. Their vision is that everyone is able to have trust and confidence in the police.
The IOPC have jurisdiction over 43 geographic police forces and a number of other smaller forces:
- British Transport Police
- National Crime Agency
- His Majesty's Revenue & Customs (HMRC)
- Home Office (former UK Border Agency and Border Force)
- Police and Crime Commissioners
About the IOPC
The IOPC have different roles including; regional directors, operations managers, operations team leaders, lead investigators, investigators and trainee investigators. The IOPC provides a 24 hour on call provision.
They have conducted a huge range of investigations including taser discharges, fatal firearms discharges, fatal police pursuits, suicides, near misses in custody and domestic abuse. Over the past five years, the IOPC have seen an increase in CSA/CSE cases and APSP.
They have offices and teams right across the country, the locations are listed below:
The IOPC have seven offices located in:
- Birmingham
- Cardiff
- Central London
- Croydon
- Sale
- Wakefield
- Warrington
Investigation teams are based across six regions:
- Greater London
- South East
- Midlands and Central
- North East
- North West
- Wales and South West
IOPC considerations
Complaints
Any expression of dissatisfaction by a member of the public about a police force.
Conduct matters
Any matter where there is an indication that the police may have behaved in a manner which would justify criminal or disciplinary proceedings.
Death or serious injury matters
Any circumstances in, or as a result of which, a person has died or sustained serious injury and was either in police custody or had recently come into contact with the police and there is an indication that the contact, directly or indirect, caused or contributed to the death or serious injury.
Modes of investigation (MOI)
When the IOPC are brought in they will make one of the four decisions on how to proceed:
Return to force
An investigation is not required.
Local investigation
An investigation is required, and it is suitable to be completed by the force professional standards department.
Directed investigation
An investigation will take place under their direction and control, but they will use police resources to conduct and complete the investigation.
Independent investigation
The IOPC will conduct a full independent investigation.
Core indicators
Public confidence
All the other considerations feed into public confidence. Where there is already evidence that the public are aware of an issue and damage to public confidence is being caused, or the potential damage to confidence is particularly severe, this should be given greater weight.
Other considerations:
In addition to the indicators, decision makers are mindful of our responsibilities under the ECHR in respect or Articles 2 and 3* when assessing referred matters. They are also mindful of the College of Policing 'Guidance on outcomes in police misconduct proceedings' when assessing allegations of potential misconduct.
Article 2 - Investigation
Any investigation where Article 2 is engaged must:
- Be independent
- Identify those responsible for use of force
- Be capable of leading to a determination as to whether force was justified
- Be prompt and expeditious; and
- Be open to public scrutiny to ensure accountability
Referrals
It is mandatory to refer the following incidents to the IOPC:
- Death or serious injury
- Serious assault, occasioning actual bodily harm
- Serious sexual offences
- Serious corruption (including abuse of position)
- Behaviour which may lead to a misconduct or criminal sanction which is aggravated by discrimination
- A relevant offence (carries potential sentence of seven years or more)
Police integrity reforms
- More proportionate, less adversarial system with more focus on learning and improvement.
- Streamlining processes, improving timeliness. Improving transparency, cooperation and fairness.
- Under the previous system, where action was taken, 81% was management action (i.e. no need for a notice to be served).
- Need for locally-led resolutions that focus on identifying issues and specific steps to address shortcomings/learning quickly and proportionately.
- Discipline threshold
- An investigation is subject to special procedures if it appears to the person investigating that there is an indication that a person to whose conduct the investigation relates may have:
- committed a criminal offence, or
- behaved in a manner which would justify the bringing of disciplinary proceedings.
Changes to discipline systems
Practice requiring improvement (PRI)
- Local handling of matters that are not gross misconduct or misconduct. ‘Putting things right’ through clear actions and constructive outcomes.
- Replaced management action (not a form of disciplinary proceedings). Increased focus on learning, reflection and improvement, not blame, punishment and sanctions. Participation, openness, engagement.
- Essentially underperformance or conduct not meeting the misconduct threshold which falls short of the expectations of the service and the public (Code of Ethics).
New definition of misconduct, changes to severity assessment process
- Conduct that, if proven, would lead to the imposition of a written warning.
- Gross misconduct is unchanged (a breach of the Standards of Professional Behaviour so serious that, if proven, dismissal would be justified).
Investigation outcomes
When officers and staff may need your support
There are some key times during the IOPC process that the officer or member of staff being investigated may need the support of a welfare support officer
Media coverage
When the IOPC and / or their force press office sends out a press release, this will coincide with the case being referred/declared.
Where an IOPC investigation is underway, the usual practice of the IOPC will be to not name any officer or member of staff who is the subject of that investigation.
Where a case is particularly sensitive, we may have ‘if asked’ lines only, but the usual approach is to announce an investigation.
Updates
Updates are issued every 28 days (by email/letter.)
The Regulation 17 notice has a tick-box for provision of updates to the Federation.
There is at present no national mechanism for updating welfare officers, please check your own force policy.
An update letter will be sent at 12 months by the Chief Constable or Police and Crime Commissioner.
Report and decision
The report is issued to the AA with a provisional decision on conduct/performance. There may also be learning recommendations.
The AA will indicate whether they agree or not. All proceedings are now directed by the IOPC (no AA determination).
Once the outcomes are finalised, the report is provided to the officer by the force (NB - if there is a pending inquest and the officer is giving evidence, it may not be appropriate to share at that point).
Referral to CPS
The referral test: A criminal offence may have been committed and the IOPC deems it is appropriate to refer (not a realistic prospect of conviction test- the IOPC does not apply the Full Code Test for advice files).
Most serious cases will be dealt with by special crime (London). Low level cases tend to go to local CPS.
Where an officer or staff member is charged with an offence, the usual practice of the IOPC will be for it thereafter to name that officer or staff member in any of its publications that refer to the charges.
Unless precluded by order of the court, when an officer or staff member is convicted of any criminal offence, the IOPC will name that officer or staff member in any of its publications that refer to the conviction. A criminal conviction is a matter of public record.
Misconduct proceedings
Once a misconduct charge has been laid against an officer and that charge is subject of a hearing, the usual IOPC practice will be to name the officer in any publications that refer to the matter.
Misconduct hearings for police officers are held in public unless the person chairing decides it is appropriate to hold proceedings in private. Forces are likely to publish the names of officers facing proceedings.
Once a misconduct charge has been laid against an officer and that charge is to be subject of a misconduct meeting, the usual practice of the IOPC will be to not name that officer in any publications referring to the matter.
Inquest
The officer or member of staff under investigation may be required to give evidence at an inquest.
It is sometimes the case that an officer does not have a case to answer in respect of an IOPC investigation but is criticised by the coroner at the inquest. The coroner has a broad remit, and may seek and hear evidence that was not within the terms of reference of the IOPC investigation.
Forces will be represented at contentious inquests.
Final press release / publication of report
Some cases will be very high profile and the press will make efforts to identify subject officers if they have not been named.
The IOPC’s default position in respect of publication is to publish a brief anonymised summary of the investigation and outcomes on its website.
Where a case is particularly high profile and it is in the public interest, a full report may be published.
Police witnesses
If an officer is a witness, i.e. they played a role in respect of a DSI matter, where no notices were served or they are a witness only in respect of a complaint or conduct matter, they have no legal entitlement to updates.
This is problematic, as many witnesses panic that their statement may lead to an investigation into their conduct.
To compound matters, the officer/welfare officer will be unable to obtain a full update from the force, as the IOPC will be the investigating body.
The WSO should make contact with the investigator to ask for an update if there are welfare concerns.