Regulation 15 Role of person conducting the misconduct proceedings

After regulation 16 (appointment of person to conduct misconduct proceedings), insert—

“Role of person conducting the misconduct proceedings

16A.

(1)

The person conducting the misconduct proceedings must take appropriate action to ensure the efficient and effective bringing of proceedings and that proceedings are conducted in a timely, fair and transparent manner.

(2)

In particular, and subject to paragraph (3), the person conducting the misconduct proceedings must ensure that the first day of the misconduct proceedings is not more than 100 working days later than the date on which the misconduct form is treated as having been given to the constable in accordance with regulation 15(4A).

(3)

Where the person conducting the misconduct proceedings considers that it would be in the interests of justice to do so, the person conducting the misconduct proceedings may extend the period of 100 working days specified in paragraph (2).

(4)

Failure to comply with the time limits in paragraphs (2) and (3) does not invalidate the misconduct proceedings.

(5)

The person conducting the misconduct proceedings must decide, before the end of 6 working days beginning with the date on which the investigator’s report and related documents are received by the person conducting the misconduct proceedings in accordance with regulation 16B, whether to conduct a misconduct pre-hearing, in order to agree directions in advance of the misconduct proceedings, and to determine any outstanding issues relating to—

(a)

the date, time, location or duration of the misconduct proceedings,

(b)

any lists of witnesses and which, if any, witnesses should attend the misconduct proceedings,

(c)

any documents or other information supplied under regulation 13,

(d)

any procedural or preliminary legal arguments or points of law raised which the person conducting the misconduct proceedings considers appropriate to be dealt with at the misconduct pre-hearing, and

(e)

disclosure of documents.

(6)

At the misconduct pre-hearing the person conducting the misconduct proceedings may give such directions as the person conducting the misconduct proceedings considers appropriate for the fair, efficient and timely conduct of the misconduct proceedings.

(7)

Directions given under paragraph (6) are binding on the parties unless varied or revoked by the person conducting the misconduct proceedings.

(8)

The person conducting the misconduct proceedings may vary or revoke a direction where satisfied that it is in the interests of justice to do so.

(9)

A misconduct pre-hearing—

(a)

must be conducted by the person conducting the misconduct proceedings alone, and

(b)

may be attended by—

(i)

the constable (including any representative),

(ii)

the deputy chief constable (including any representative),

(iii)

the presenting officer, and

(iv)

any assessor appointed.

(10)

A misconduct pre-hearing may be conducted by telephone or by such other electronic means as may be agreed between the parties, or, where the parties fail to agree, as decided by the person conducting the misconduct proceedings.

(11)

Where the person conducting the misconduct proceedings decides to hold a misconduct pre-hearing, the person conducting the misconduct proceedings must, as soon as practicable, and subject to any reasonable alternative date and time proposed by the constable, give reasonable notice to the parties of the date, time, expected duration and location of the misconduct pre-hearing.

(12)

Where a person entitled to attend a misconduct pre-hearing has been given reasonable notice in accordance with paragraph (11) but fails to attend, the person conducting the misconduct proceedings may proceed with the misconduct pre-hearing in that person’s absence.

(13)

Where the person conducting the misconduct proceedings decides to conduct a misconduct pre-hearing, the pre-hearing must be held as soon as reasonably practicable, having regard to the duty under paragraph (1) and the time limit specified in paragraph (2).

(14)

Within the period of 5 working days beginning with the date of the misconduct pre-hearing, the person conducting the misconduct proceedings must serve on the parties—

(a)

a summary of the key matters discussed at the misconduct pre-hearing, and

(b)

a record of any directions issued,

which must include details of any witness lists agreed by the parties and any determinations and directions made as to the witnesses who are to give evidence at the misconduct proceedings.

(15)

For the purposes of this regulation, “the parties” means the constable, the deputy chief constable and the presenting officer, and any representatives of the same.

Documents to be supplied

16B.

(1)

As soon as practicable after the misconduct form is sent to the constable in accordance with regulation 15(2) and the constable has complied with the duty in regulation 15(5), the deputy chief constable must supply the person conducting the misconduct proceedings in accordance with regulation 16(1) and the presenting officer appointed in accordance with regulation 16C(1) with a copy of—

(a)

any documents given to the constable under regulation 15(2) and (4), and

(b)

any documents provided by the constable under regulation 15(5), (6) and (7).

(2)

Where the constable has not complied with regulation 15(5), the deputy chief constable must, as soon as reasonably practicable, supply the person conducting the misconduct proceedings and the presenting officer with a copy of the documents referred to in paragraph (1)(a).

Presenting officer

16C.

(1)

The deputy chief constable must appoint a person (the “presenting officer”) who has the appropriate skills, knowledge and expertise to present the case against the constable at the misconduct hearing.

(2)

The presenting officer may be—

(a)

a constable of a rank senior to the constable who is subject to the misconduct allegation,

(b)

a member of police staff, or

(c)

a legally qualified person instructed for that purpose.

(3)

The deputy chief constable must not appoint as the presenting officer any person whose appointment could give rise to a reasonable concern as to whether that person could act impartially in relation to the proceedings.”.