Response 1800741

Back to Response listing

Code of ethics

1.1A. Do you agree that there should be a statutory requirement for Police Scotland to have a Code of Ethics?

Please select one item
Yes
No
Don't know

1.1B. Please explain your answer using the free text box below

Free Text Box
It’s important that the police have a set of guidelines that they adhere to. Without them your actions will be interpreted in many ways.

1.1C. Should it be possible to amend and/or update any statutory Code of Ethics when required?

Please select one item
Yes
No
Don't know

1.1D. If Police Scotland is required by law to have a Code of Ethics, who should be responsible for preparing that Code of Ethics?

Please select one item
Chief Constable of Police Scotland
Scottish Police Authority (SPA)
The Chief Constable and SPA jointly
Other (please specify)
Don't know

1.1E. If Police Scotland is required by law to have a Code of Ethics, should whoever is responsible for it's preparation (as per question 1.1D above) be required to consult on it?

Please select one item
Yes
No
Don't know

1.1F. If there were a requirement for a Code of Ethics to be consulted upon who should be consulted?

Free Text Box
The Law society and representatives from community groups.

1.1G. If Police Scotland is required by law to have a Code of Ethics, should the body (or bodies) responsible for its preparation (as per question 1.1D above) be responsible for publishing that Code of Ethics?

Please select one item
Yes
No
Don't know

1.1H. Do you have any further comments you wish to make in relation to a Code of Ethics?

Further Comments.
No

Duty of candour and co-operation

1.2A. To what extent do you agree or disagree that there should be an explicit statutory duty of candour on the police to co-operate fully with all investigations into allegations against its officers?

Please select one item
Strongly agree
Agree
Neither agree nor disagree
Disagree
Strongly disagree

1.2B. If an explicit statutory duty of candour is to be placed on the police, should this be on the police as an organisation or on individual officers?

Please select one item
Police Scotland as an organisation
Individual officers
Both Police Scotland as an organisation and individual officers
Don't know

1.2C. If an explicit statutory duty of candour is to be placed on the police (either as an organisation or on individual officers), should this relate specifically to incidents involving on duty officers only?

Please select one item
Yes
No
Don't know

1.2D. If an explicit statutory duty of candour is to be placed on individual police officers, should that duty only apply when an officer’s status as a witness has been confirmed?

Please select one item
Yes
No
Don't know

1.2E. Should police officers have a statutory duty of co-operation to assist during investigations, inquiries and formal proceedings?

Please select one item
Yes
No
Don't know

1.2G. If a statutory duty of co-operation should apply to police officers as per question 1.2E, should this also apply to police staff (or former police staff)?

Please select one item
Yes, for both police staff and former police staff
Yes, for current police staff but not former police staff
No
Don’t know

1.2H. Do you think any of the following should be required if officers have a statutory duty to co-operate during investigations, inquiries and formal proceedings? Please select all options that apply.

Please select all that apply
Yes, officers should be required to participate openly
Yes, officers should be required to participate promptly
Other (please specify)
No
Don’t know

1.2I. If a statutory duty of co-operation is to be placed on the police, should that duty relate specifically to incidents involving on duty officers only?

Please select one item
Yes
No
Don't know

1.2J. Should the Police Investigations and Review Commissioner (PIRC) have a statutory power, where it is necessary and proportionate, to compel police officers to attend within a reasonable timescale for interview?

Please select one item
Yes
No
Don't know

1.2K. If the Police Investigations and Review Commissioner (PIRC) is to be provided with a power to compel police officers to attend within a reasonable timescale for interview, how should a reasonable timescale for interview be determined?

Please select one item
PIRC to determine timescales
Timescales to be set in legislation
Other (please specify)
Don’t know

1.2L. In light of questions 1.2A-1,2K above, should the Scottish Government consider possible amendments to the constable’s declaration to reflect an obligation to assist with investigations, where appropriate?

Please select one item
Yes
No
Don't know

1.2M. In light of questions 1.2A-1.2K above, should the Scottish Government consider possible amendments to the Standards of Professional Behaviour to reflect an obligation to assist with investigations, where appropriate?

Please select one item
Yes
No
Don't know

1.2N. Do you have any further comments you wish to make in relation to statutory duties of candour and co-operation?

Further Comments
In light of recent events within Scottish and British politics, I don’t think the Scottish or British government should be anywhere near this legislation.

Whistleblowing

1.3A. Should people working in Police Scotland be able to raise their concerns about wrongdoing within that organisation (“whistleblowing concerns”) with an independent third-party police oversight organisation? Please select one option only.

Please select one item
Yes, with the PIRC
Yes, with another body (please specify)
No
Don’t know

1.3B. Should people working in the Scottish Police Authority be able to raise their concerns about wrong doing within that organisation (“whistleblowing concerns”) with an independent third-party police oversight organisation? Please select one option only.

Please select one item
Yes, with the PIRC
Yes, with another body (please specify)
No
Don’t know

1.3C. Should concerns raised about wrongdoing within policing in Scotland (“whistleblowing concerns”) be audited by an independent third-party police oversight organisation? Please select one option only.

Please select one item
Yes, with the PIRC
Yes, with another body (please specify)
No
Don’t know

1.3D. Do you have any further comments you wish to make in relation to an independent third-party police oversight organisation?

Free Text Box
Whistleblowing is a fundamental right for anyone who sees wrongdoing within their organisation. That person should have protections from being made a scapegoat and their issue should be properly investigated.

Legal Aid in Article 2 cases

1.4A. Should legal aid be available to all families of people who die in police custody or following police contact, regardless of their ability to pay?

Please select one item
Yes
No
Don't know

1.4B. Are there any other factors that you think should be taken into account when assessing applications for civil legal aid in Article 2 cases?

Free Text Box
It should be income based whether that income is legal or not. The whole system should be overhauled to ensure integrity and stop misuse.

1.4C. Should there be an opportunity in Article 2 cases, where appropriate, for family and common interest groups to receive civil legal aid funding on a group basis?

Please select one item
Yes
No
Don't know

1.4D. Do you have any further comments you wish to make in relation to the provision of civil legal aid to families in Article 2 cases?

Free Text Box
Legal aid has been abused on many occasions both by lawyers and accused persons to bring sometimes unsubstantiated cases against officers.

Death of a serving police officer

1.5A. Should the existing law be clarified regarding PIRC’s powers to investigate an incident involving the death of a serving police officer?

Please select one item
Yes
No
Don't know

1.5B. Please explain your answer using the free text box below.

Free Text Box
The circumstance surrounding the death of a serving police officer are no different to others. Why would their be a need not to. Are police officers 2nd class citizens?

Definition of "Person serving with the police" and "Member of the public"

1.6A. Should the term “Person serving with the police” be more clearly defined?

Please select one item
Yes
No
Don't know

1.6B. Should the definition include clarity on PIRC powers to investigate the following people? Please select all options that apply.

Please select all that apply
Officers who have since retired from the service
Officers who have since resigned from the service
Officers who were off duty at the time of the incident (“act or omission”)
Other (please specify)

1.6D. Should the term “Member of the public” be more clearly defined, to make clear who may make a relevant complaint?

Please select one item
Yes
No
Don't know

1.6E. If “Member of the public” is to be defined, should any definition make clear that it includes a serving police officer who is off duty at the time of the incident?

Please select one item
Yes
No
Don't know

1.6 F. Do you have any further comments you wish in relation to defining a “Member of the public”?

Free Text Box
The “member of the public” should be someone who has a legitimate interest in the case at hand. Not 2nd or 3rd hand info passed through another person.

Changes to Police Investigations and Review Commissioner (PIRC) structure

2.1A. Should the PIRC should be re-designated as a Commission?

Please select one item
Yes
No
Don't know

2.1B. If PIRC is re-designated as a Commission, do you agree that two deputy Commissioners should be appointed?

Please select one item
Yes
No
Don't know

2.1C. Please explain your answers using the free text box

Free Text Box
The PIRC works fine as it is.

2.1D. If Deputy Commissioners are to be appointed, should they be required to have any particular expertise? For example, should a Deputy be required to have legal knowledge?

Free Text Box
It needs to be someone who has in depth knowledge of procedures.

2.1E. If Deputy Commissioners are to be appointed, should any categories of person be precluded from being appointable? For example, do you think former senior police officers should be able to apply?

Free Text Box
Politicians or ex politicians should not be allowed. This is a vocation. Not a job for personal gain.

2.1F. If Deputy Commissioners are to be appointed, who in your view should be responsible for appointing them?

Free Text Box
The Police Authority along with senior officers in the Service.

2.1G. Do you agree that a statutory Board should be created?

Please select one item
Yes
No
Don't know

2.1H. Please explain your answer using the free text box

Free Text Box
It’s just another board to fill a gap made by this consultation.

2.1I. How do you think that the Police Investigations and Review Commissioner (PIRC) should be appointed? Please select one option only.

Please select one item
Remain a Scottish Ministerial appointment
Or the appointment be made on nomination of the Scottish Parliament
Don’t Know

2.1J. Please explain your answer using the free text box

Free Text Box
Neither of the above would be my choice as I don’t trust these bodies to be impartial. Sorry!

2.1K. Do you agree that PIRC should be appointed by Her Majesty the Queen?

Please select one item
Yes
No
Don't know

2.1L. Please explain your answer using the free text box

Free Text Box
The Queen doesn’t pick them, only appoints them as a formality so No.

2.1M. Where do you think that accountability arrangements for PIRC should sit? Please select one option only.

Please select one item
Remain with the Scottish Ministers
Transfer to the Scottish Parliament
Don’t Know

2.1N. Please explain your answer to using the free text box

Free Text Box
As per previous. I Don’t trust politicians to make unbiased decisions unless there is some personal gain for them. Accountability doesn’t sit easy in politics.

Increased powers for the Police Investigations and Review Commissioner (PIRC)

2.2A. Should PIRC be able to access the Police Scotland complaints and conduct database remotely?

Please select one item
Yes
No
Don't know

2.2B. Please explain your answer using the free text box

Free Text Box
There has to be openness and integrity in all investigations and access to relevant information is important

2.2C. If PIRC is to have access to Police Scotland’s complaints and conduct database, are there any safeguards or limits which should be put in place? Please provide details using the free text box below.

Free Text Box.
They should only have access to relevant information and not be able to browse it to find other unrelated evidence of wrongdoing.

2.2D. Do you have any further comments you wish to make in relation to PIRC being given access to the complaints and conduct database?

Free text Box
If we have nothing to hide why wouldn’t we allow it?

2.2E. Do you agree that the PIRC requires this additional power to call in an investigation of a complaint?

Please select one item
Yes
No
Don't know

2.2F. Should the PIRC be able to investigate a complaint against Police Scotland in certain circumstances? Please select all options that apply.

Please select all that apply
Yes, if there is sufficient evidence that Police Scotland has not dealt with a complaint properly
Yes, if the complainer provides compelling evidence of a failure on the part of Police Scotland
Yes, if the Commissioner assesses that it would be in the public interest to carry out an independent re-investigation
Yes, other (please specify)
No
Don’t know

2.2H. Noting HMICS' role, should the PIRC be able to investigate a current practice of Police Scotland if the Commissioner believes it would be in the public interest?

Please select one item
Yes
No
Don't know

2.2I. Noting HMICS' role, should the PIRC be able to investigate a current policy of Police Scotland if the Commissioner believes it would be in the public interest?

Please select one item
Yes
No
Don't know

2.2J. If the PIRC is to be given a new power enabling them to investigate current practices or policies of Police Scotland, should the power to investigate be restricted or limited in any way?

Please select one item
Yes
No
Don't know

2.2K. Do you have any further comments in relation to Questions 2.2A-2.2H on increased investigative and audit powers for PIRC?

Free Text Box
This should only be carried out if in normal course a policy or procedure is found wanting it should not be carte Blanche to investigate everything they find during a trawl. It’s a waste of time and money that would be better spent.

2.2L. Should recommendations from the PIRC be put on a statutory footing similar to current reconsideration directions following a review and/or audit of police complaints handling?

Please select one item
Yes, following a review
Yes, following an audit
Yes, following both a review and an audit
No
Don't know

2.2M. Following a complaint handing review or audit of complaint handling reviews, should Police Scotland or other policing bodies be required to act on those recommendations if it is in the public interest?

Please select one item
Yes, with no restrictions
Yes, unless there is an overriding operational or practical reason not to
Yes, except for another reason (please specify)
No
Don’t know

2.2N. Should Police Scotland have to respond to recommendations made by the PIRC following a review of police complaints handling?

Please select one item
Yes
No
Don't know

2.2O. Should Police Scotland have to respond to recommendations made by the PIRC following an audit of police complaints handling?

Please select one item
Yes
No
Don't know

2.2P. Do you have any further comments you wish to make in relation to the PIRC making recommendations following a complaint handling review or audit of police complaints handling; or in relation to Police Scotland or other policing bodies acting on any such recommendations?

Free Text Box
We should not go fishing in every case that’s been handled to find flaws. It should only be the case that when clear problems have been found.

Gross misconduct proceedings to be held in public

3.1A. Should police officer gross misconduct hearings be held in public?

Please select one item
Yes
No
Don't know

3.1B. Please explain your answer using the free text box below

Free Text Box
The findings should be made public.

3.1C. If gross misconduct hearings are to be held in public, should these hearings be for officers of all ranks who are being investigated for gross misconduct, or senior officers only?

Please select one item
All ranks of officers
Senior officers only
Don’t know

3.1D. If gross misconduct hearings are to be heard in public, should the Chair of a hearing have discretion to restrict attendance as they see appropriate?

Please select one item
Yes
No
Don't know

3.1E. If you answered “Yes” to Question 3.3D, under which circumstances should attendance be restricted?

Free Text Box
Where the matter could lead to personal attack on the person in question. Where the matter could be detrimental to national security.

Protection of vulnerable witnesses

3.1F. To what extent do you agree or disagree that in addition to the existing protections for witnesses, the Chair of the gross misconduct hearing should consider whether the evidence of any vulnerable witnesses should be heard in private to ensure the protection of such vulnerable witnesses (this may include the officer who is the subject of the proceedings)?

Please select one item
Strongly agree
Agree
Neither agree nor disagree
Disagree
Strongly disagree

3.1G. In addition to the existing protections for witnesses, to what extent do you agree or disagree that the Chair of the gross misconduct hearing should be obliged to consider any other reasonable adjustments that they believe to be necessary to ensure the protection of such vulnerable witnesses (this may include the officer who is the subject of the proceedings)?

Please select one item
Strongly agree
Agree
Neither agree nor disagree
Disagree
Strongly disagree

3.1H. If you agree the Chair of gross misconduct hearings should be obliged to consider other reasonable adjustments to ensure protection of vulnerable witnesses, what reasonable adjustments should be considered? Please provide details using the free text box below.

Free Text Box
Anonymity, video attendance, screening in place, in extreme cases there should be considerations to the protection of that witness

Gross misconduct hearing outcomes to be made public

3.1I. To what extent do you agree or disagree the outcome of gross misconduct proceedings should be made public?

Please select one item
Strongly agree
Agree
Neither agree nor disagree
Disagree
Strongly disagree

3.1K. To what extent do you agree or disagree that an illustrative, publicly available list of matters likely to be considered by a gross misconduct hearing would be useful?

Please select one item
Strongly agree
Agree
Neither agree nor disagree
Disagree
Strongly disagree

3.1L. If a publicly available list of matters to be considered by a gross misconduct hearing were to be available who should be responsible for its publication?

Free Text Box
HMIC

3.1M. If a publicly available list of matters to be considered by a gross misconduct hearing were to be available, should a finding of gross misconduct always result in dismissal, unless there are exceptional circumstances to justify an alternative sanction?

Please select one item
Yes
No
Don't know

3.1N. If the outcome of gross misconduct proceedings is to be made public, should the Chair’s report, subject to any necessary redactions, be published by the Scottish Police Authority on its website?

Please select one item
Yes
No
Don't know

3.1O. If the Chair’s report is to be published by the Scottish Police Authority on its website as per question 3.1N, what type of details, if any, should be redacted? Please provide details using the free text box below.

Personal details

3.1P. If the outcome of gross misconduct hearings is to be published by the Scottish Police Authority on its website, how long should the report be available online?

Please select one item
Made available online for at least 28 days
Made available online for a different period (please specify)
Don’t know

3.1Q. Dame Elish highlighted a number of areas where amendments to the conduct regulations should be considered or regulations could be clarified. Do you agree that these further recommendations should be considered as policy is further developed?

Please select one item
Yes
No
Don't know

3.1R. If you have any further views to share in relation to changes to the regulations that should be considered as part of this work, please outline them in the text box below.

Free Text Box
The way in which Officers are treated when they become subject to proceedings.

Composition of gross misconduct hearing panels

3.1S. From which category of person should the appointment of the Chair of any misconduct hearing which is considering allegations against senior officers, be made? Please select one option only.

Please select one item
An independent legally qualified person
A member of the SPA
HM Chief Inspector of Constabulary
A senior expert in policing (other than HM Chief Inspector)
An independent lay person
An HR professional
Other (please specify)

3.1T. In addition to an appointed Chair (as per question 3.1S above), should any misconduct hearing which is considering allegations against senior officers include members made up of any of the following categories of person? Please select all options that apply.

Please select all that apply
An independent legally qualified person
A member of the SPA
HM Chief Inspector of Constabulary
A senior expert in policing (other than HM Chief Inspector)
An independent lay person
An HR professional
Other (please specify)

3.1U. Please explain your answers to questions 3.1ST-3.1T using the free text box below.

Free Text Box
Police should not be in overall charge of investigating Police. The others provide a broad spectrum of qualified persons and HR person can assist with the best course of action relative to employment.

3.1V. From which category of person should the appointment of the Chair of any gross misconduct hearing which is considering allegations against an officer of the rank of Chief Superintendent, be made? Please select one option only.

Please select one item
An independent legally qualified person
A member of the SPA
A senior expert in policing
An independent lay person
An HR professional
Other (please specify)

3.1W. In addition to an appointed Chair, should any gross misconduct hearing which is considering allegations against an officer of the rank of Chief Superintendent include members made up of any of the following categories of person? Please select all options that apply.

Please select all that apply
An independent legally qualified person
A member of the SPA
A senior expert in policing
A senior officer from another police service
A retired senior officer
An independent lay person
An HR professional
Other (please specify)

3.1X. Please explain your answers to questions 3.1V-W above using the free text box below.

Free Text Box
It’s self explanatory

3.1Y. From which category of person should the appointment of the Chair of any gross misconduct hearing which is considering allegations against non-senior officers below the rank of Chief Superintendent be made? Please select one option only.

Please select one item
An independent legally qualified person
A member of the SPA
A serving officer of the rank of superintendent or above who is at least two ranks higher than the subject officer
An independent lay person
An HR professional
Other (please specify)

3.1Z. In addition to an appointed Chair (as per question 3.1Y above), should a gross misconduct hearing which is considering allegations against non-senior officers below the rank of Chief Superintendent include members made up of any of the following categories of person? Please select all options that apply.

Please select all that apply
An independent legally qualified person
A member of the SPA
A serving officer of the rank of superintendent or above who is at least two ranks higher than the subject officer
An independent lay person
An HR professional
Other (please specify)

3.1AA. Please explain your answers to questions 3.1Y-Z above using the free text box below.

Free Text Box
As per previous No serving offices and I have no confidence in SPA.

3.1BB. Do you agree that the Lord President should appoint the Chair of a misconduct hearing which is considering allegations against officers? Please select all options that apply.

Please select all that apply
Yes, for senior officers
Yes, for Chief Superintendents
Yes, for non-senior officers below the rank of Chief Superintendent
No, not for any police officer
Don’t know

3.1CC. Do you agree that the Lord President should appoint the panel of a misconduct hearing which is considering allegations against officers? Please select all options that apply

Please select all that apply
Yes, for senior officers
Yes, for Chief Superintendents
Yes, for non-senior officers below the rank of Chief Superintendent
No, not for any police officer
Don’t know

3.1DD. Please explain your answers to questions 3.1BB-CC above using the free text box below.

Free Text Box
Rank does not make the allegations any less.

Anonymous complaints

3.5D. When the relevant body is deciding whether an investigation into an allegation against a senior officer or non-senior officer should be carried out, should that body take into consideration whether an allegation is made anonymously?

Please select one item
Yes, for senior officers
Yes, for non-senior officers
No, not for any police officers
Don’t know

3.5E. When the relevant body is deciding whether an investigation into an allegation against a senior officer or non-senior officer should be carried out, should that body take into consideration whether an allegation is sufficiently specific in time and location? Please select one option only.

Please select one item
Yes, for senior officers
Yes, for non-senior officers
No, not for any police officers
Don’t know

3.5F. When the relevant body is deciding whether an investigation into an allegation against a senior officer or non-senior officer should be undertaken, should that body take into consideration whether an allegation is malicious?

Please select one item
Yes, for senior officers
Yes, for non-senior officers
No, not for any police officers
Don’t know

3.5G. When the relevant body is deciding whether an investigation into an allegation against a senior officer or non-senior officer should be undertaken, should that body take into consideration whether an allegation is vexatious?

Please select one item
Yes, for senior officers
Yes, for non-senior officers
No, not for any police officers
Don’t know

3.5H. Please explain how, in your view, it can be ensured that genuine complaints are not misrepresented as “vexatious” or “malicious”.

Free Text Box
Proper investigation of the facts surrounding the allegation should determine whether it is vexatious or malicious

Recommendation to suspend

3.5L. Should the PIRC have the ability to recommend the suspension of a senior officer?

Please select one item
Yes
No
Don't know

3.5M. If the PIRC is to be able to recommend the suspension of a senior officer, to what extent do you agree or disagree that suspension should only be recommended in circumstances when not suspending the officer may prejudice an effective misconduct investigation?

Please select one item
Strongly agree
Agree
Neither agree nor disagree
Disagree
Strongly disagree

3.5N. Please explain your answer using the free text box below

Free Text Box
It’s important that integrity remains the most important factor.

3.5O. If the PIRC is to be able to recommend the suspension of a senior officer, should the PIRC be required to provide supporting reasons when they make such a recommendation to the SPA?

Please select one item
Yes
No
Don't know

Alternatives to suspension

3.7R. Should there be a condition which must be met before an officer is suspended? Please select all options that apply.

Please select all that apply
Yes, that temporary redeployment to alternative duties has been considered
Yes, that a temporary alternative location to operate from has been considered
Yes, other (please specify)
No
Don’t know

3.7S. If a condition must be met before it is recommended that an officer is suspended, which officers should this relate to?

Please select one item
All ranks of officers
Senior officers only
Don’t know

3.7T. Should all suspended officers have the terms of their suspensions reviewed regularly? Please select one option only.

Please select one item
Yes, suspension should be reviewed every 4 weeks
Yes, suspension should be reviewed on another time frame (please specify)
No
Don’t know
Please Specify
3 months

Special constables

3.8A. Do you agree that conduct regulations for special constables should be revised to bring them in line with those for regular police officers?

Please select one item
Yes
No
Don't know

Liability for unlawful conduct

4.1A. Should liability for unlawful conduct, provided to all other constables when carrying out their functions, be extended to cover the rank of Chief Constable?

Please select one item
Yes
No
Don't know

4.1B. Please explain your answer using the free text box below.

Free Text Box
A person is liable if the are directly responsible for the outcome of those actions. Rank does not change that.

About You

Are you responding as an individual or an organisation?

Please select one item
(Required)
Individual
Organisation