Amendment of the modifications to the Conduct Regulations
3.—(1) The modifications to the Conduct Regulations in their application to former officers set out in Schedule 2 to the Ministry of Defence Police (Conduct, Performance and Appeals Tribunals) Regulations 2020 are amended as follows.
(2) In paragraph 5 (modification to regulation 7 (legal and other representation)), for paragraph (d) substitute “paragraph (6) were omitted”.
(3) In paragraph 16 (modification to regulation 21 (general)) omit paragraphs (a) and (b).
(4) In paragraph 22 (modification to regulation 27 (persons conducting misconduct proceedings))—
(a)for paragraph (b) substitute—
“(b)in paragraph (4) for “The panel must comprise” there were substituted “Subject to paragraphs (5) and (5A), where the case is referred to a misconduct hearing, that hearing must be conducted by a panel of three persons, comprising”;”;
(b)for paragraph (c) substitute—
“(c)“in paragraph (5), for “where the officer concerned is a senior officer the panel must comprise” there were substituted “where the case is referred to a misconduct hearing and the officer concerned was a senior officer at the relevant time, that hearing must be conducted by a panel of three persons comprising”;”;
(c)after paragraph (c) insert—
“(d)in paragraph (5A) for “is the chief constable” there were substituted “was the chief constable at the relevant time;”;
(e)in paragraph (5E)—
(i)for “is not a senior officer” there were substituted “was not a senior officer at the relevant time”;
(ii)paragraph (b) were omitted;
(f)in paragraph (5F)—
(i)“or Ombudsman, as the case may be,” were omitted;
(ii)paragraph (b) were omitted.”.
(5) Omit paragraph 23 (modification to regulation 28 (role of chair of misconduct hearing)).
(6) In paragraph 24 (modification to regulation 29 (notice of referral to misconduct proceedings))—
(a)for paragraph (b) substitute “paragraph (2) were omitted”;
(b)in paragraph (c), for sub-paragraph (ii) substitute “sub-paragraph (b) were omitted”;
(c)in paragraph (d), for paragraph (ii) substitute “or to any person appointed under regulation 7(6) to advise the person conducting or chairing the misconduct meeting” were omitted;
(d)for paragraph (e) for “and (7)” substitute “, regulation 7(6)”.
(7) In paragraph 27 (modification to regulation 32 (misconduct pre-hearing)) omit paragraph (c).
(8) In paragraph 33 (modification to regulation 38 (reporting restrictions, participation and exclusion from proceedings)) for paragraph (b)(ii) substitute—
“(ii)omit from “in the case” to “misconduct hearing”;”.
(9) In paragraph 37 (modification to regulation 42 (notification of outcome))—
(a)in paragraph (a) after paragraph (iii) insert—
“(iv)in para (e) for “but the disciplinary action imposed was not dismissal without notice” there were substituted “but disciplinary action for gross misconduct was not imposed”;”.
(b)for paragraph (e) substitute—
“(e)in paragraph (5)—
(i)sub-paragraph (b) were omitted,
(ii)in sub-paragraph (d) for “the disciplinary action imposed was not dismissal without notice” there were substituted “disciplinary action for gross misconduct was not imposed”.”;
(10) Omit paragraph 40 (modification to regulation 47 (general)).
(11) In paragraph 43 (modification to regulation 51 (notice of referral to accelerated misconduct hearing))—
(a)before paragraph (a) insert—
“(za)in paragraph (1)(c)—
(i)the “and” after sub-paragraph (i) were omitted;
(ii)after sub-paragraph (i) there were inserted—
“(ia)in the case of a Condition C person, any written statement or document provided to the Director General under regulation 4B(3) and any response to a consultation carried out under regulation 4B(4), and”;”;
(b)for paragraph (a) substitute—
“(a)in paragraph (2)—
(i)in sub-paragraph (b), paragraph (ii) and the “or” immediately preceding it were omitted;
(ii)the “and” after paragraph (d) were omitted;
(iii)after paragraph (d) there were inserted—
“(da)set out the fact that the officer will be subject to disciplinary proceedings under these Regulations, and
(db)set out the fact that, if the allegation of gross misconduct is proved, the officer may be subject to a finding that the officer would have been dismissed if the officer had not ceased to be a member of the MDP,”,”.
(12) In paragraph 47 (modification to regulation 55 (persons conducting accelerated misconduct hearing)) after paragraph (b) insert—
“(c)in paragraph (4)(a)(ii) after “office concerned” there were inserted “was at the relevant time”;
(d)in paragraph (8)—
(i)for “is not a senior officer” there were substituted “was not a senior officer at the relevant time”;
(ii)paragraph (b) were omitted;
(e)in paragraph (9)—
(i)“or Ombudsman, as the case may be,” were omitted;
(ii)paragraph (b) were omitted.”.
(13) For paragraph 52 (modification to regulation 63 (notification of outcome)), substitute—
“Regulation 63 is to be read as if—
(a)in paragraph (1)—
(i)for sub-paragraph (c) there were substituted—
“(c)whether disciplinary action for gross misconduct was imposed,”;
(ii)in sub-paragraph (d) for “the disciplinary action imposed was not dismissal without notice” there were substituted “no disciplinary action for gross misconduct was imposed”;
(b)in paragraph (4)(a) “or the Ombudsman” were omitted both times it occurs;
(c)in paragraph (4)(c) for “the disciplinary action imposed was not dismissal without notice” there were substituted “no disciplinary action for gross misconduct was imposed”;”.