Judgment on vetting-based dismissal highlights ‘lack of understanding’, says Women’s Aid
Sophie Francis-Cansfield, Head of Policy at Women’s Aid, said this week’s High Court ruling which found the Metropolitan Police Service’s (MPS) vetting dismissal scheme unlawful, highlights the “continued lack of understanding around the nature of domestic abuse and sexual misconduct by police officers”.
She said: “This decision has been made despite evidence showing time and time again that there are profound issues in police vetting processes, which have allowed dangerous perpetrators to join police ranks and exploit their powerful positions for abuse.
“Forces need to be able to take action against those who are accused of misconduct, including violence against women and girls, and are no longer fit to keep their vetted status.”
The High Court judgment was in relation to a judicial review in the case of MPS Sergeant Lino Di Maria following withdrawal of his vetting after allegations of rape and his conduct towards women, although he was not charged.
Sgt Di Maria applied to the court for judicial review, challenging the lawfulness of the MPS’s decision to remove his vetting and refer him to gross incompetence proceedings.
He challenged the wider Operation Assure process, which is the MPS’s procedure, based on national guidance, to consider dismissing officers who can no longer pass vetting.
The judge, Mrs Justice Lang, said the force’s “powers do not extend to the dismissal of a police officer by reason of withdrawal of vetting clearance”.
She said statutory misconduct procedures “should not be circumvented, directly or indirectly, by the use of more informal internal vetting procedures”.
The judgment was published on Tuesday (February 11) following the judicial review heard at the High Court between January 15 and 16.
The judgment found that it was unlawful to terminate the claimant police officer’s service with the MPS, following withdrawal of his vetting, and quashed the relevant decisions taken internally.
MPS Commissioner Sir Mark Rowley said it was “absurd” that the force cannot lawfully sack officers who are “not fit to hold vetting”, warning policing has been “left in a hopeless position”.
Ms Francis-Cansfield said: “Women’s Aid supports recommendations made by His Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary and Fire and Rescue Services and the Angiolini Inquiry relating to vetting, recruitment, misconduct and misogyny in policing.
“We also support the 12-point plan for responding to police perpetrated domestic abuse recommended by the Centre for Women’s Justice, which includes external police forces carrying out all criminal investigations into police perpetrators.
“The Home Office should regularly monitor the introduction of these recommendations, ensuring police forces are held to account. Survivors of abuse need to feel that they can confidently report their experiences to the police, when the perpetrator is an officer but also when they are not.
“This will only be possible if tangible changes are made, and forces have the power to remove those accused of misconduct from ranks.”