The Ministry of Defence Police (Conduct, Performance and Appeals Tribunals) Regulations 2020

Outcome of misconduct proceedings

41.—(1) The person or panel conducting misconduct proceedings may, subject to the provisions of this regulation—

(a) impose any one of the disciplinary actions mentioned in paragraph (2) or (3) as appropriate;

(b) where they find the conduct amounts to neither gross misconduct nor misconduct, direct that the matter is referred to be dealt with under the reflective practice review process.

(2) The disciplinary action available at a misconduct meeting is—

(a) a written warning,

(b) a final written warning.

(3) The disciplinary action available at a misconduct hearing is—

(a) where the person or panel conducting the misconduct proceedings decide that the conduct of the officer concerned amounts to misconduct, in accordance with regulation 40(15)—

(i) a written warning,

(ii) a final written warning,

(iii) reduction in rank, where paragraph (5) or (6) applies,

(iv) dismissal without notice, where paragraph (5) or (6) applies,

(b) where the person or panel conducting the misconduct proceedings decide the conduct of the officer concerned amounts to gross misconduct, in accordance with regulation 40(15)—

(i) a final written warning,

(ii) reduction in rank,

(iii) dismissal without notice.

(4) The disciplinary action referred to in paragraph (3) has effect from the date on which it is notified to the officer concerned.

(5) This paragraph applies where a final written warning was in force on the date of the severity assessment made under regulation 13(1) or external procedures.

(6) This paragraph applies where it is decided at misconduct proceedings that the officer’s conduct amounts to misconduct and the decision is based on the officer’s conduct arising from more than one incident and those incidents are not closely factually connected.

(7) A written warning must not be given where, on the date of the severity assessment under regulation 13(1) or external procedures, the officer concerned had a written warning in force.

(8) Neither a written warning nor a final written warning must be given where, on the date of the severity assessment under regulation 13(1) or external procedures, the officer concerned had a final written warning in force.

(9) Where a written warning or final written warning is given, that warning remains in force for—

(a) a period of 18 months beginning with the day on which it was notified to the officer concerned, in the case of a written warning, or

(b) a period of 2 years beginning with the day on which it was notified to the officer concerned, in the case of a final written warning.

(10) Where a final written warning is given under paragraph (3), the period in paragraph (9)(b) may be extended, by the persons considering the question of disciplinary action, to a maximum period of 5 years.

(11) The references to a period in paragraph (9)(a) and (b), including any such period as extended, if relevant, in accordance with paragraph (10), does not include any time when the officer is taking extended special unpaid leave.

(12) Reduction in rank may only be imposed under this regulation where the persons imposing the disciplinary action consider this is an appropriate sanction, taking into account the views of the relevant authority including in relation to the likely operational impact.

(13) Where, on the date of the severity assessment under regulation 13(1) or under external procedures, the officer concerned is subject to a reduction in rank under these Regulations or the Ministry of Defence Police (Conduct) Regulations 2004(1), a reduction in rank must not be imposed.

(14) Where the question of disciplinary action is being considered, the person or panel considering it—

(a) must have regard to the record of police service of the officer concerned as shown on the officer’s personal record,

(b) may receive evidence from any witness whose evidence would, in their opinion, assist them in determining the question, and

(c) must give—

(i) the officer,

(ii) if the officer is legally represented, the officer’s relevant lawyer or, if the officer is not legally represented, the officer’s police friend,

(iii) the relevant authority or the person appointed to represent such authority in accordance with regulation 7(5),

(iv) the Director General or the Director General’s relevant lawyer, where the Director General made a decision under regulation 24(1) to present the case, and

(v) the Ombudsman or the Ombudsman’s relevant lawyer, where the Ombudsman has been directed to present the case under regulation 24(6),

an opportunity to make oral or written representations before any such question is determined, including on the appropriate level of disciplinary action, and

(d) where representations are received in relation to mitigating circumstances—

(i) must consider whether those circumstances have been mentioned at an earlier stage in the proceedings and, if they have not been so mentioned, whether the officer could reasonably have been expected to so mention them, and

(ii) in the light of their conclusions under paragraph (i), may determine that it is appropriate to place less weight on those circumstances.

(1)

S.I. 2004/653.