The Ministry of Defence Police (Conduct, Performance and Appeals Tribunals) (Amendment) Regulations 2024

Explanatory Note

(This note is not part of the Regulations)

These Regulations amend the Ministry of Defence Police Conduct Regulations and the modifications to those Regulations set out in Schedules 1 and 2 to the Ministry of Defence Police (Conduct, Performance and Appeals Tribunals) Regulations 2020 (S.I. 2020/1087) (“the 2020 Regulations”).

Regulation 1 makes general provision.

Regulation 2 amends the Conduct Regulations set out in Schedule 1 to the 2020 Regulations (“the Conduct Regulations”). References to numbered regulations are to the paragraph so numbered in that Schedule.

Paragraph (2) inserts a new definition of “Chief Inspector of Constabulary” and “an inspector of constabulary” which replace the existing definition of “the Inspector of Constabulary”, inserts a definition of “the parties”, omits the definition of “interested party” (which is inserted in regulation 14 - see paragraph (5)), amends the definition of “practice requiring improvement”. It also amends the rules on delegation to allow the chief constable to delegate responsibility for chairing or conducting disciplinary proceedings to others, and in limited cases, allows the delegation to a member of another police force.

Paragraph (3) removes the power to appoint a legal adviser to the person or panel conducting misconduct proceeding which is provided for in other regulations (see paragraphs (7) and (20)).

Paragraph (4) inserts a new regulation to deal with conflicts of interest (new regulation 11A) for persons appointed to a regulated position and in relation to the chief constable where they are the chair of misconduct proceedings.

Paragraph (7) makes changes to the composition of panels that deal with misconduct proceedings. It removes the legally qualified chairs and replaces them with i) the Chief Inspector of Constabulary or an inspector of Constabulary they nominate, where the officer concerned is the chief constable, ii) a senior police officer from another force, where the officer concerned is another senior officer; and iii) the chief constable where the officer concerned is a non-senior officer. The other two members of the panel are lay members. It also requires that a legally qualified person is appointed to advise the panel (and chair). The regulation also enables the Director General and Ombudsman to make recommendations to the chief constable as to whether they should delegate responsibility for chairing a hearing to a member of another police force, and requires the chief constable to have regard to such a recommendation.

Paragraphs (9) and (18) make changes to the matters to be included in a notice of referral to misconduct proceedings and accelerated misconduct proceedings. They also make other amendments consequential on some of the other changes made by these regulations (for example the rules relating to those to whom the officer concerned can object to).

Paragraph (12) makes a minor amendment to remove superfluous words.

Paragraphs (13) and (21) require the chair to give written reasons to the Secretary of State where they have issued directions that have the effect of excluding persons from a hearing.

Paragraphs (14) and (22) require any legal advice given to the panel by the legally qualified person to be given to the parties.

Paragraphs (15) and (23) require that where a finding of gross misconduct is made but this does not lead to dismissal without notice, that the reasons for this decision are given to the relevant authority and for a copy of the report of the hearing to be sent to the Secretary of State. They also allow the chair to delegate the preparation of the report of the hearing to the legally qualified person.

Paragraph (20) makes changes to the composition of panels that deal with accelerated misconduct hearings and other changes that are similar to those made by paragraph (7).

Paragraphs (5), (6), (8), (10), (11), (17) and (19) make minor consequential amendments.

Paragraph (16) corrects some minor errors in regulation 44 of the Conduct Regulations.

Regulation 3 makes amendments to Schedule 2 to the 2020 Regulations for former MDP officers which are consequential on the amendments made to Schedule 1 by Regulation 2, apart from paragraph (13) which corrects an error in paragraph 52 of Schedule 2 (which modifies regulation 63 of the Conduct Regulations).

Regulation 4 is a saving provision.

Paragraph (1) provides that the amendments made by regulations 2 and 3 do not apply to cases where the officer concerned has been given a notice of referral to misconduct proceedings or an accelerated misconduct meeting before the Regulations come into force.

Paragraph (2) provides that the rule in paragraph (1) does not apply to amendments made by regulation 2(16) and 3(13) which correct errors.

A full impact assessment has not been produced for this instrument as no, or no significant, impact on the private, voluntary or pubic sector is foreseen.