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

Interpretation and delegation

2.—(1) In these Regulations—

“accelerated misconduct hearing” means a hearing to which the officer concerned is referred under regulation 49 after the case has been certified as one where the special conditions are satisfied;

“allegation” means an allegation relating to a complaint, conduct matter or practice requiring improvement;

“appeal meeting” means a meeting held in accordance with regulation 45;

“chief constable” means the chief constable of the MDP;

“conduct” includes acts, omissions, statements and decisions (whether actual, alleged or inferred);

“Convention rights” has the meaning given to it in section 1 of the Human Rights Act 1998(1);

“criminal proceedings” means—

(a)

any prospective criminal proceedings, or

(b)

all criminal proceedings brought which have not been brought to a conclusion (apart from the bringing and determination of any appeal other than an appeal against conviction);

“disciplinary action” means, in order of seriousness starting with the least serious action—

(a)

a written warning,

(b)

a final written warning,

(c)

reduction in rank, or

(d)

dismissal without notice;

“disciplinary proceedings” means—

(a)

misconduct proceedings under Part 4 of these Regulations,

(b)

an accelerated misconduct hearing under Part 5 of these Regulations, or

(c)

an appeal from a misconduct hearing or from an accelerated misconduct hearing under the Appeals Tribunals Regulations;

“extended special unpaid leave” means unpaid leave for a period of more than three months which the Secretary of State has agreed may be taken by the officer concerned;

“gross misconduct” means a breach of the Standards of Professional Behaviour that is so serious as to justify dismissal;

“harm test” has the meaning given to it in regulation 5;

“informant” means a person who provides information to an investigation on the basis that the person’s identity is not disclosed during the course of the disciplinary proceedings;

“the Inspector of Constabulary” means—

(a)

in relation to England and Wales and Northern Ireland, Her Majesty’s Chief Inspector of Constabulary appointed under section 54(1) of the Police Act 1996(2) or an inspector of constabulary nominated by the Chief Inspector of Constabulary, and

(b)

in relation to Scotland, one of Her Majesty’s Inspectors of Constabulary appointed under section 71 of the Police and Fire Reform (Scotland) Act 2012(3);

“interested party” means a person whose appointment could reasonably give rise to a concern as to whether the person could act impartially under these Regulations;

“investigator” means a person—

(a)

appointed under regulation 14, or

(b)

appointed or, as the case may be, designated as an investigator under external procedures established for England and Wales or Northern Ireland;

“misconduct” means a breach of the Standards of Professional Behaviour that is so serious as to justify disciplinary action;

“misconduct hearing” means a hearing to which the officer concerned has been referred under regulation 23 to determine whether the conduct of the officer amounts to misconduct or gross misconduct or neither and whether disciplinary action should be imposed;

“misconduct meeting” means a meeting to which the officer concerned has been referred under regulation 23 to determine whether the conduct of the officer amounts to misconduct or not and whether disciplinary action should be imposed;

“misconduct proceedings” means a misconduct meeting or misconduct hearing;

“officer concerned” means the MDP officer, or former MDP officer, in relation to whose conduct as an MDP officer there has been an allegation;

“police friend” means a person chosen by the officer concerned in accordance with regulation 6;

“practice requiring improvement” means underperformance or conduct not amounting to misconduct or gross misconduct, which falls short of the expectations of the public and the police service as set out in the “Code of Ethics” issued by the College of Policing under section 39A of the Police Act 1996 (codes of practice for chief officers)(4);

“proposed witness” means a witness whose attendance at the misconduct proceedings the officer concerned or the relevant authority, as the case may be, wishes to request of the person conducting or chairing those proceedings;

“reflective practice review process” means the process set out in Part 6;

“relevant authority” has the meaning given in section 4(4) of the 1987 Act(5);

“severity assessment” has the meaning given to it in regulation 13;

“special conditions” has the meaning given to it in regulation 49;

“staff association” means—

(a)

in relation to an MDP officer other than a senior officer, the Defence Police Federation, and

(b)

in relation to a senior officer, the Chief Police Officers’ staff association;

“Standards of Professional Behaviour” has the meaning given in regulation 4 and references in these Regulations to the Standards of Professional Behaviour are to be construed accordingly.

(2) In these Regulations—

(a) references to external procedures are to external procedures established for England and Wales or Northern Ireland unless otherwise stated,

(b) references to paragraphs of Schedule 3 to the 2002 Act are to those paragraphs as applied under an agreement under section 26(1) of that Act, and

(c) references to sections of the 1998 Act are to those sections as applied under an agreement under section 60(1) of that Act.

(3) Where the relevant authority is the chief constable, the chief constable may, subject to paragraph (4), delegate any functions under these Regulations to a member of the MDP of at least the rank of inspector.

(4) Where the chief constable delegates their functions under regulation 10 (suspension of officer) or 49 (referral to accelerated misconduct hearing), the following decisions must be authorised by a senior officer—

(a) a decision under regulation 10 to suspend an officer or to continue or end such a suspension,

(b) a decision under regulation 49 as to whether to certify a case as one where the special conditions are satisfied.

(5) For the purposes of these Regulations, the making of a protected disclosure by an MDP officer is not a breach of the Standards of Professional Behaviour.

(6) In paragraph (5), “protected disclosure” has the meaning given by section 43A of the Employment Rights Act 1996 (meaning of protected disclosure)(6), or, in Northern Ireland, in Article 76B of the Employment Rights (Northern Ireland) Order 1996(7).

(1)

1998 c. 42.

(2)

1996 (c. 16); to which there are amendments not relevant to these Regulations.

(3)

2012 (asp. 8).

(4)

The Code of Ethics (A Code of Practice or the Principles and Standards of Professional Behaviour for the Policing Profession of England and Wales), July 2014. This publication is available for download at: http://www.college.police.uk/en/20989.htm. A copy of this publication can be obtained from the College of Policing. Section 39A was inserted by section 2 of the Police Reform Act 2002 (c. 30) and was amended by paragraph 30 of Schedule 16 to the Police Reform and Social Responsibility Act 2011 (c. 13) and section 124 of the Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014 (c. 12).

(5)

The definition of “relevant authority” was amended by paragraph 3 of Schedule 7 to the Policing and Crime Act 2017.

(6)

1996 c. 18. Section 43A was inserted by section 1 of the Public Interest Disclosure Act 1998 (c. 23).

(7)

1996 N.I. 16. Article 76B was inserted by the Public Interest Disclosure (Northern Ireland) Order 1998 (N.I. 17), Article 3.