Greater clarity on operational independence vital to maintain police impartiality

An absence of the definition of operational independence can prove challenging for police chiefs, the police inspectorate has warned, as any form of improper political interference can affect the public’s perception of police impartiality.

In a new report into impartiality and activism in policing, HMICFRS found that legislation and guidance currently “don’t adequately define the boundary between the police’s operational independence and the appropriate exercise of democratic accountability and governance”.

Inspectors found that all those responsible for following the Policing Protocol Order 2023 need more clearly defined guidance. For example, inspectors found that chief constables and police and crime commissioners (PCCs) still do not always understand the delineation of their roles and responsibilities.

The inspectorate found other systemic problems, including a near-total absence of any definition, guidance, or judicial consideration of impartiality in respect of policing.

It also said that the Police Regulations 2003 covering the impartiality duty and relevant guidance needed to be reviewed and updated.

Inspectors found that the police seek to act “without fear or favour” in difficult circumstances. But the guidance to support them has not kept pace with modern-day policing when having to navigate politicised or contentious issues.

As a result, this can lead to officers misinterpreting and misrepresenting the impartiality duty. It can also lead to accusations of biased policing.

Greater clarity is needed on what precisely the impartiality duty means and what it does and does not cover, the inspectorate said.

Inspectors also found the legal interpretation of the Equality Act 2010 is now “too complicated”, particularly in respect of ‘belief’ as a protected characteristic, and the legal framework of what constitutes a belief.

HMICFRS said forces urgently need a better and more consistent understanding of how the 2010 Act applies to modern and increasingly complex policing contexts.

HMICFRS has made 22 recommendations to chief constables, police forces and others. These include clarifying the impartiality duty and operational independence, reviewing and updating the Equality Act 2010, and updating policies on governance arrangements for non-crime hate incidents and police staff networks.

His Majesty’s Chief Inspector of Constabulary Andy Cooke QPM DL said: “This has been one of the most challenging inspections we have carried out, with inspectors exploring complex legislation, regulations and relationships.

“It deals with policing’s sometimes difficult role in keeping the peace, meeting the needs of individuals or groups who have opposing views and simultaneously upholding everyone’s rights.

“The operational independence of chief constables is a cornerstone of policing in the UK. And the exercise of democratic accountability and governance is also a fundamental element of policing.

“Chief constables must be held to account for how efficiently and effectively they carry out their duties. There is a delicate balance to strike between these equally important concepts.”

He added: “In our inspection, we found that chief constables and PCCs don’t always understand the delineation of their roles and responsibilities.

“Chief officers also told us that they often experience what they believe to be improper pressure or interference from significant political figures. We found that overt attempts to influence operational policing challenge the police’s impartiality and could reduce public trust.

“It is clear that legislation and guidance have not kept pace with modern-day policing issues. We have set out some recommendations to provide the clarity needed for the police to be, and appear to be, impartial to keep the public’s trust and confidence.

“Alongside this, police chiefs, PCCs, mayors and senior politicians should pay close attention to the risk posed by improper political interference, whether actual or perceived.”

In September last year, HMICFRS was commissioned by former Home Secretary Suella Braverman to inspect police involvement in politically contested matters.

As part of the inspection, several areas were considered. These included the police’s policies and decision-making; how officers are trained; how police deal with non-crime hate incidents; the police’s work with external advisory groups; and how effectively forces communicate with the public, particularly on contentious issues.

HMICFRS was due to publish this report in July this year, but the announcement of a general election led to a delay in reporting the findings.

The College of Policing says “impartiality and independence of police service is vital”.

Responding to the HMICFRS report, college chief executive officer, Chief Constable Sir Andy Marsh, said: “I’m grateful to HMICFRS for providing a thoughtful report on a complex issue. The College of Policing will take time to carefully consider the recommendations made.

“The impartiality and independence of the police service is vital if we are to maintain and build the trust of our communities.

“Acting with fairness and treating everyone with dignity and respect, without fear or favour, is a central part of the new Code of Ethics, launched by the college earlier this year.

“The inspectorate is right to point out the need for greater clarity on how the Equality Act applies in real-world policing contexts.

“I welcome any further guidance from the Government including, as the inspector recommends, possible clarification or amendments to legislation for the consideration of Parliament.”

Association of Police and Crime Commissioners joint leads on Transparency and Accountability, Alison Lowe OBE and Rupert Matthews, said: “The principle of police impartiality is vital, should be upheld and be free of improper political interference.

“The report finds that, in the main, police officers and staff do apply these principles. That said, police and crime commissioners (PCCs) welcome the opportunity to work with other sector bodies to ensure the police have clear guidance and tools to apply them.

“PCCs have a vital statutory duty to perform, to hold chief constables to account for their efficiency and effectiveness on behalf of the public, and the performance of the force’s officers and staff. They are the voice of the public in policing and an essential part of policing governance.

“The report acknowledges the respective remits that chief constables and PCCs have in delivering for the public and keeping them safe.”