F1SCHEDULE 3Modifications to these Regulations in their application to former officers

Annotations:
Amendments (Textual)

Modification to regulation 33 (procedure at misconduct proceedings)31

Regulation 33 is to be read as if—

a

in the heading, for “proceedings” there were substituted “hearing”;

b

in paragraph (1), for “conducting or chairing the misconduct proceedings” there were substituted “chairing the misconduct hearing” and for “those proceedings” there were substituted “that hearing”;

c

in paragraph (2), for “proceedings”, in the first place where it appears, and “form of misconduct proceedings taking place” there were substituted “hearing”;

d

in paragraph (3), for “conducting or chairing the misconduct proceedings” there were substituted “chairing the misconduct hearing” and for “the proceedings” there were substituted “the hearing”;

e

in paragraphs (4) and (7), for “proceedings” there were substituted “hearing”;

f

in paragraph (5), for “proceedings”, in the first two places where it appears, there were substituted “hearing”;

g

in paragraph (6), “(at a misconduct hearing)” were omitted;

h

in paragraphs (8) and (9), for “conducting or chairing the misconduct proceedings” there were substituted “chairing the misconduct hearing” and in paragraph (9) for “those proceedings” there were substituted “that hearing”;

i

in paragraph (10)—

i

for “proceedings”, in both places where it appears, there were substituted “hearing”;

ii

in sub-paragraph (b)—

aa

after “Act” there were inserted “, regulation 19A(2) (notice of enquiry of person concerned during investigation) of the Police (Complaints and Misconduct) Regulations 2012 (as modified by regulation 27 of, and the Schedule to, those Regulations)”;

bb

after “16(1)” there were inserted “, 17A(2)”;

j

after paragraph (10) there were inserted—

10A

Where evidence is given or considered at the misconduct hearing that the officer concerned was given written notice of an interview under regulation 17(5) (interviews during investigation) and failed to attend the interview, paragraph (12) applies.

k

in paragraphs (12), (13) and (14), for “person or persons conducting the misconduct proceedings” there were substituted “persons conducting the misconduct hearing”;

l

in paragraph (13), for the words from “amounts” to the end there were substituted “amounts to misconduct, gross misconduct or neither.”;

m

in paragraph (15), for “misconduct proceedings conducted by a panel” there were substituted “a misconduct hearing”;

n

in paragraph (16)—

i

for “proceedings”, in all three places where it appears, there were substituted “hearing”;

ii

“meeting or” were omitted;

iii

in sub-paragraph (c), for the words from “misconduct or” to the end there were substituted “gross misconduct, a recommendation as to whether disciplinary action should be imposed; and”;

o

in paragraph (17), for “proceedings” there were substituted “hearing”.