Met Police Commissioner Wants Power Back From Lawyers to Sack ‘Rogue’ Officers

Sir Mark Rowley voices concern that reform will be 'watered down'

Metropolitan Police Commissioner Sir Mark Rowley speaks to the media at the launch of a mobile phone robbery intervention initiative in Ealing, west London, on Aug. 8, 2023. (Jonathan Brady/PA)

Police chiefs should regain the power to sack “rogue” officers, the head of the Metropolitan Police said on Wednesday.

Met Commissioner Sir Mark Rowley said the power now rests with lawyer-led external panels, which he said are “fundamentally soft.”

The commissioner also urged the Home Office, which is conducting a review into the police dismissal process, not to have reforms “watered down” by those who “want the government to protect the status quo.”

Mr. Rowley vowed to “get rid of” corrupt officers in October last year after an independent review by Baroness Louise Casey found “many examples of unacceptable behaviour going unchecked for long periods.”

The commissioner has since repeatedly demanded more power to make sacking “rogue” officers easier.

Writing in The Times of London on Wednesday, Mr. Rowley said the legally qualified chairs (LQCs), who have the final say on dismissals, made the process “slower, more biased and, most importantly, softer on standards.”

Independent LQCs were given the power to run disciplinary hearings following a consultation in 2015 (pdf) to “ensure judgments are legally sound.”

The Police Federation of England and Wales (PFEW) have said that forces were “essentially marking their own homework before LQCs came in.”

The PFEW said it was “very clear” to them that police chiefs who presided over misconduct hearing “had made their mind up about the fate of an officer, positive or negative, even before they had heard any evidence.”

But Mr. Rowley has argued that the process meant officers who should have been sacked were allowed to remain in their jobs.

According to Mr. Rowley, statistics show disciplinary hearings were 38 percent more likely to result in dismissal before the LQCs were introduced, when the hearings were chaired by senior Met officers.

In LQC-lead hearings, black or minority ethnic officers were twice as likely to be sacked, he added.

Mr. Rowley told The Times of London LQCs are “fundamentally soft” and without leadership responsibilities, “they’re not thinking about public confidence in the same way.”

He also complained that the process is too slow, and that he can’t “appeal even unduly lenient decisions.”

According to Mr. Rowley, 209 Met officers are waiting for misconduct hearings on full pay, many of whom have been suspended, but only 49 have had their hearing dates set.

Rowley: ‘Watered Down’ Reform Will Send Wrong Message

The Home Office’s review into police officer dismissal process across the country, which was launched in January, was initially set to conclude in May. But the report has been delayed.

Mr. Rowley said he’s “hopeful” the report will include the reforms he had called for, but is concerned the Home Office may publish a “watered down version” and send a message that “the system as a whole is weak on standards.”

“There will be those, including the Police Federation of England and Wales, who want the government to protect the status quo or make only minimal changes. They will, I’m sure, suggest that doing otherwise goes against the interests of officers,” he wrote.

“I would disagree. Restoring trust and confidence in policing matters just as much to the tens of thousands of honest, hardworking, brave officers who have been repeatedly let down by a minority as it does to the public.”

A Home Office spokeswoman told The Times of London: “Officers who fall seriously short of the standards expected have no place in our police, and we must ensure they can be dismissed as swiftly as possible. That is why we launched our dismissals review, which we will publish shortly.”

In an email to The Epoch Times, the PFEW said officers “have the right to a fair, open, and transparent process to decide allegations against them, and not a mechanism which hands out verdicts through a high-handed, pre-determined hearing lacking legal understanding and knowledge of police regulations.”

PFEW National Chair Steve Hartshorn said he agreed that unfit individuals “must be identified and removed” to maintain public trust, but argued the panel should be improved upon instead of being abolished “if the process is failing to operate effectively, as it is being claimed.”