The Police (Efficiency) (Amendment) Regulations 2003

Explanatory Note

(This note is not part of the Regulations)

These Regulations amend the Police (Efficiency) Regulations 1999, which make provision with respect to the efficiency of members of police forces and establish procedures for cases in which members of police forces may be dealt with by requirement to resign or reduction in rank.

Regulation 3 provides that a civilian manager of a police officer may act as reporting officer or countersigning officer for the purposes of the 1999 Regulations.

Regulations 4 and 8 provide respectively that a police officer can be required to attend a first or second interview not only in respect of unsatisfactory performance but also or alternatively in respect of unsatisfactory attendance, and in the latter case this requirement may be imposed by a civilian manager.

Regulations 7 and 11 provide respectively that in the case of a first or second interview related to unsatisfactory attendance, the interview will be deemed to have taken place even if the police officer concerned fails to attend it.

Regulation 14 provides that in a case related to unsatisfactory attendance there is no requirement on the chairman of an inefficiency hearing to postpone or adjourn the hearing even if he is satisfied that the officer concerned has good reason for failing to attend that hearing.

Regulation 16 sets out the sanctions that are available at an inefficiency hearing related to an officer’s attendance. These include a requirement to resign, redeployment to other duties and a warning that a failure to improve attendance can lead to another inefficiency hearing. In addition the hearing may make a finding that an officer has been given insufficient support, in which case measures may be specified to assist him.

Regulation 17 sets out the procedure for assessing an officer’s attendance following a warning given to him at an inefficiency hearing.