Police Complaints and Discipline (Jersey) Law 1999

Information about the publication of Ministerial Decisions

A formal published “Ministerial Decision” is required as a record of the decision of a Minister (or an Assistant Minister where they have delegated authority) as they exercise their responsibilities and powers.

Ministers are elected by the States Assembly and have legal responsibilities and powers as “corporation sole” under the States of Jersey Law 2005 by virtue of their office and in their areas of responsibility, including entering into agreements, and under any legislation conferring on them powers.

An accurate record of “Ministerial Decisions” is vital to effective governance, including:

demonstrating that good governance, and clear lines of accountability and authority, are in place around decisions-making – including the reasons and basis on which a decision is made, and the action required to implement a decision
providing a record of decisions and actions that will be available for examination by States Members, and Panels and Committees of the States Assembly; the public, organisations, and the media; and as a historical record and point of reference for the conduct of public affairs

Ministers are individually accountable to the States Assembly, including for the actions of the departments and agencies which discharge their responsibilities.

The Freedom of Information Law (Jersey) Law 2011 is used as a guide when determining what information is be published. While there is a presumption toward publication to support of transparency and accountability, detailed information may not be published if, for example, it would constitute a breach of data protection, or disclosure would prejudice commercial interest.

A decision made (08.03.06) to agree to promote an amendment to Article 21 of the Police Complaints and Discipline (Jersey) Law 1999.

Subject:	Police Complaints and Discipline (Jersey) Law 1999 – proposed amendment
Decision Reference:	MD-HA-2006-0024	Exempt clause(s):
Type of Report (oral or written):		Person Giving Report (if oral):
Telephone or e-mail Meeting?		Report File ref:		HAD/DPT 9
Written Report – Title:	Police Complaints and Discipline (Jersey) Law 1999 – proposed amendment	Written report – Author:		Karen Slack Executive Officer Home Affairs
Decision(s): To agree to promote an amendment to Article 21 of the Police Complaints and Discipline (Jersey) Law 1999, which concerns complaints about members of the Honorary Police.
Reason(s) for decision: The Attorney General has highlighted an inconsistency in Article 21 of the Police Complaints and Discipline (Jersey) Law 1999. It is necessary to remove the requirement in Article 21(5) that where informal resolution of a complaint is impossible, the Connétable must be directed by the Attorney General to request the Chief Officer to carry out an investigation. However, the provisions by which the Connétable must notify the Attorney General of the outcome of any attempt at informal resolution of the complaint will remain.
Action required: The Executive Officer to provide law drafting instructions to the Law Draftsman to give effect to the amendment.
Signature: (Minister/ Assistant Minister)			Date of Decision:

Police Complaints and Discipline (Jersey) Law 1999

POLICE COMPLAINTS AND DISCIPLINE ( JERSEY ) LAW 1999

PROPOSED AMENDMENT

Background

The Attorney General would like an amendment to the Police Complaints and Discipline (Jersey) Law 1999 to be promoted. The amendment centres on a difficulty with Article 21 of the Law, which concerns complaints about members of the Honorary Police.

Article 21(3) provides that a complaint against a member of the Honorary Police is not suitable for informal resolution unless a complainant gives his consent; and the Attorney General is satisfied that the conduct complained of, even if proved, would not justify a criminal charge or disciplinary hearing.

It follows in Article 21(4) that if it appears to the Connétable, after attempts have been made to resolve a complaint informally, that informal resolution of the complaint is impossible, he shall inform the Attorney General.

Under Article 21(5), if it appears to the Attorney General that a complaint is not suitable for informal resolution, or the Connétable informs him that informal resolution of a complaint is impossible, the Attorney General shall notify the Police Complaints Authority of the complaint; and direct the Connétable to request the Chief Officer, States of Jersey Police, to appoint a member of the Force (or a police officer from some other force, of at least the rank of inspector), to carry out an investigation.

It would seem that the purpose of the investigation above would be to ascertain whether a charge should be laid, and a disciplinary hearing conducted. Yet, in accordance with Article 21(3) no informal resolution should be approved by the Attorney General where the conduct would justify a disciplinary hearing.

It is the view of the Attorney General that this is inconsistent, and requires changing. He feels that it is not sensible to require the States of Jersey Police to use valuable resources in the investigation of matters which are not sufficiently serious as to justify a disciplinary hearing.

Proposed amendment

The proposed amendment would be to remove the requirement in Article 21(5) for the Attorney General to direct the Connétable to request the Chief Officer to carry out an investigation where informal resolution of a complaint is impossible.

However, it is the view of the Attorney General that it would be desirable to retain the provisions whereby a Connétable must notify the Attorney General of the outcome of an attempt at informal resolution. This would provide a monitoring mechanism by which further steps may be taken if appropriate.

There is no requirement to inform the Police Complaints Authority in minor cases of complaints against members of the Honorary Police, and there would therefore seem to be no reason to require the Attorney General to notify the Authority where informal resolution has failed. The reason for this existing provision is that the Authority may wish to supervise the investigation by the States of Jersey Police. If, by amendment, the necessity for there to be an investigation is removed, there is no need for the Authority to be notified.

Recommendation

I recommend that the Minister agrees to promote the amendment as requested by the Attorney General, and requests the Executive Officer to provide law drafting instructions to the Law Draftsman to give effect to the amendment.

Miss K. L. Slack

Executive Officer, Home Affairs

20th December 2005