ROUTINE IOPC investigations should be done and dusted within a year, according to South Yorkshire Police Federation.<\/p>\n
Currently, conduct investigations into officers can rumble on for years \u2013 with one high profile case taking more than 11 years to resolve.<\/p>\n
The IOPC has now vowed to keep officers and those involved in cases better informed about their progress. It says it is now committed to a three-month deadline to update officers about the status of each one.<\/p>\n
But that doesn\u2019t go far enough for South Yorkshire Police Federation Chairman Steve Kent, who is demanding the \u201cincompetent\u201d watchdog undergoes urgent reform.<\/p>\n
Steve wants to see a 12-month full stop applied to all cases \u2013 and says if they take longer, then they should be independently scrutinised as to why.<\/p>\n
He said: \u201cWe\u2019ve got several cases in South Yorkshire which have been going on for years now, let alone months.<\/p>\n
\u201cThere needs to be a specific, mandatory maximum period absolutely nailed on, hypothetically speaking 12 months, and if they want to go beyond that, then there\u2019s external scrutiny as to why.<\/p>\n
\u201cThere needs to be a limit which investigations cannot go past unless an independent scrutiny body is involved.<\/p>\n
\u201cIt\u2019s the same if we need to keep people on bail for an amount of time, they\u2019ve got to do that same thing for police officers.<\/p>\n
\u201cCurrently we\u2019ve got officers waiting for literally years for very simple and actually sometimes moderately low-level investigations that are being supervised.\u201d<\/p>\n
IOPC Director General Michael Lockwood said the watchdog was learning lessons.<\/p>\n
He told PFEW conduct leads: \u201cWe know that, for police officers and staff involved in our investigations, it can be a time of considerable concern.<\/p>\n
\u201cTo reduce this impact, we will introduce a new commitment that, when an investigation is not completed within three months, we will aim to confirm the status of all those involved \u2013 whether they are to be considered witnesses or to serve the appropriate misconduct notices.\u201d<\/p>\n
But Steve said delays and the impact they can have on officers and their families have stripped away much of the respect officers had for the organisation. He is calling for complete IOPC reform.<\/p>\n
He said: \u201cI welcome the IOPC recognising this it in its language, but until we see a difference, this is just words.<\/p>\n
\u201cOfficers should be scrutinised and accountable, and there\u2019s always going to be a separate body which holds policing to account.<\/p>\n
\u201cBut the IOPC should be reformed into a supervisory-only body. It\u2019s not fit for purpose in terms of investigating police officers. It\u2019s not fit; they\u2019re not equipped, they\u2019re not qualified.<\/p>\n
\u201cInstead, reform them into a body that just supervises professional standards to make sure that things are transparent because there are no better people at investigating officers who have done wrong than officers themselves. It\u2019s as simple as that.<\/p>\n
\u201cThey should supervise investigations not take them on themselves. When they do, it\u2019s a gluttony of incompetence.\u201d<\/p>\n