Today sees the resignation (or premature retirement to be
precise) of the Chief Constable of the West Midlands following a lengthy debate
about how the force handled the assessment of an international football
match. The point of interest is that the
Home Secretary wanted to sack the Chief Constable but was quickly advised that
she did not have the power to do.
S42 of the Police Act 1996 gave the Home Secretary the power
to require a Police Authority to exercise its powers to call for a Chief
Constable to retire in the interests of efficiency or effectiveness. This was
seen as a long stop power with an expectation that such issues would normally
be dealt with by a Police Authority. The
provision largely mirrored that in the Police Act 1964 (s29). More generally the Home Secretary has had
generous regulation making powers since the Police Act 1919. The brave new world of the coalition
government in 2010 saw the power of the Home Secretary to remove chief
constables disappear in the Police Reform and Social Responsibility Act
2011. The creation of Police and Crime
Commissioners to replace Police Auhtorities was seen to obviate the need for
the Home Secretary to have such a power.
The Shadow Home Secretary seemed to have missed this change
when he demanded in the House of Commons that the Home Secretary sack the Chief
Constable.
Different arrangements are in place, and always have been,
in respect of the Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis and we saw these
play out during the last weeks of the tenure of Dame Cressida Dick as
Commissioner.
The history of policing in Great Britain has witnessed many
examples of the tension between the concept of independent chief constables (who
lead bodies of constables who are themselves individual office holders) and elected
representatives at national and local levels.
A tricky constitutional balancing act is brought into play every time
the issue arises.
The government has announced its intention to get rid of
Police and Crime Commissioners, treating the last decade as a failed
experiment. The details of what will
replace them is still unknown but in the aftermath of the West Midland affair
it has also been reported that the Police Act will be amended once more to
restore the power of the Home Secretary to sack chief constables. There will be no shortage of people willing to
see political capital in the debates that will now follow. Expect outrage that the Home Secretary will take
for herself a power in this regard – even if such a power existed for at least half
a century in the recent past.
But what of Non Home Department forces (NHDF) and their
chief officers? Will the government take
the opportunity of the proposed amendments to bring them into the same ‘sackable net’?
I can confidently suggest that the thought has not occurred
to anyone in government. This is an area
where NHDPFs are easily overlooked.
Although easily lumped together in the imagination of the Home Office,
each NHDPF operates under their own, or (in the case of some port forces),
adopted legislation. For the purposes of
the dismissal of chief constables etc these forces fall outside the current,
former and proposed legislation.
Historically one does see the former River Tyne Police mentioned in certain
disciplinary and pension regulations but things there is no modern inclusion
relevant to the current question.
All forces have arrangements to deal with misconduct but
this discussion is about the powers of ministers to sack (or to ‘call for the
retirement/resignation of’) chief constables.
In the Railways and Transport Security Act 2003 the
Secretary of State is given ((s21(4)) the power to make regulations about the
suspension and removal of the Chief Constable of the British Transport
Police. I have not found any such
regulations. If any such regulations are
in existence, they would have to mirror the regulations put in place to cover
the removal of a local chief constable under the (now repealed) provisions in
the Police Act. The 2003 Act speaks to
the duty of the British Transport Police Authority to appoint a Chief Constable. It is silent on the removal of the office
holder.
The Ministry of Defence Police (MDP) is much closer to its
overseeing department than either BTP or CNC.
The key legislation is older (Ministry of Defence Police Act 1987). The Act is clear that it is the Secretary of
State who appoints the Chief Constable ((s1 (3)) and moreover that he/she may
terminate any member of the force – presumably this includes the Chief
Constable, although one would expect to see some sort of transparent process. The Secretary of State may delegate many of
his/her function to the Ministry of Defence Police Committee who he/she also
appoints.
The Energy Act 2004 lays out the statutory arrangements for
the Civil Nuclear Constabulary (CNC). It
is clear about the Secretary of State’s powers to remove the Chief Constable. Schedule 11 of the Act reproduces the powers given
to the (Home) Secretary in the original (ie pre 2011) text of the 1996 Police
Act.
An unintended consequence of the Police Reform and Social
Responsibility Act 2011 Act was to leave ministers with the power to sack the
Chief Constables of at least two of the ‘big three’ Non Home Department Forces
but denying them the same power over the chief constables of ‘mainstream’
police forces.
The system for removing chief officers from the smaller
NHDPFs varies from body to body but in most cases traditional contractual
processes would be followed. Chief
officers from these forces are denied the right to go to the Employment
Tribunal (except in cases where discrimination is alleged). (1).
The debate about the removal of chief constables is another
opportunity to look at the legislative spaghetti that wraps itself around Non
Home Department forces. The changes that
the government may introduce to restore the powers of the Home Secretary
provide an opportunity to untangle one aspect of the laws governing
NHDPFs. Although a piecemeal approach to
the reform of NHDPFs is sub optimal, any attempt to align the position of
police forces would be welcomed.
Philip Trendall
January 2026
(1)
See my
blog on this subject dated 17th November 2025
No comments:
Post a Comment