Anonymous

Difference between revisions of "Complaints Concerning Police Conduct (5:V)"

From Clicklaw Wikibooks

Complaints Concerning Police Conduct (5:V) (view source)

Revision as of 20:53, 17 May 2016

173 bytes removed ,  20:53, 17 May 2016
no edit summary
Line 46: Line 46:
==== a) Step 1: Making a Complaint ====
==== a) Step 1: Making a Complaint ====


There are two types of complaints: registered and non-registered. When someone submits a registered complaint, they will be kept informed about the investigation and its outcome, and they have a right to appeal the result. By contrast, someone submitting a non-registered complaint does not participate any  further in the process and cannot appeal the outcome.   
There are two types of complaints: registered and non-registered. When someone submits a registered complaint, they will be kept informed about the investigation and its outcome, and they have a right to appeal the result. By contrast, someone submitting a non-registered complaint does not participate any  further in the process and cannot appeal the outcome.   


The client can register a complaint by submitting it either directly to the OPCC or to an on-duty police member at the station who is assigned to receive Police Actcomplaints. A non-registered complaint can be submitted orally to any on-duty member in the station or on the road. Both types of complaints can be made through the online complaint form on the OPCC website. b)Step 2: A dmissibility  Before investigating a complaint, the Commissioner must first determine whether it is admissible. A complaint is admissible if it is made within 12 months of  the incident, is not frivolous or vexation, and contains at least one allegation that, if proved,   would   constitute   misconduct   under   section   77   of   the Police  Act. Complainants will be contacted to tell them whether their complaint is admissible or not. The Commissioner’ s determination of admissibility cannot be appealed. Once the Commissioner determines a complaint is admissible, they will send a notice of admissibility to the complainant and to the chief constable of the department involved. The chief constable must notify the member or former member of the complaint that has been made against him or her, appoint an investigator and, depending on the circumstances of the misconduct alleged, determine whether the matter is suitable for informal resolution. NOTE: Complaints about a municipal police department’ s  policies or about the services it provides, rather than about a particular incident of  misconduct, may still be admissible but should be submitted under a different process. Contact the OPCC office directly about these complaints.  c)Step 3: Informal Resolution or Mediation A complaint may be   resolved informally at any time before or during an investigation if the matter is suitable and the complainant and the police officer agree in writing to the resolution.Informal  resolution  or  mediation  is a  voluntary, confidential  process  that  provides  a  non-confrontational  opportunity  for  both parties  to  talk  to  each  other  and  hear  how  their  actions affected  the  other.  If  a complainant  does  not  want  to  meet  the  police  officer  face  to  face,  a  neutral  third party  or  professional  mediator  can  facilitate  and  help  the  parties  reach  an agreement.  Within 10  business  days  after  agreeing  to  the  proposed  informal resolution,  either  party  may  revoke  agreement  by  notifying  the  relevant  discipline authority or the Commissioner in writing.  If a complainant strongly objects to his or her complaint being informally resolved, and  would  prefer  it  be  investigated  immediately,  he  or  she  should  let  the  OPCC know  and  provide  reasons. Common  reasons  include  fear  of  intimidation  by  the officer,  the  wish  to  have  it  formally  investigated  and  substantiated,  and  a  lack  of time to participate in an informal process due to economic or other circumstances. Usually  this  objection  is  sufficient  to  move  the  complaint  directly  to  the investigation step.  
The client can register a complaint by submitting it either directly to the OPCC or to an on-duty police member at the station who is assigned to receive ''Police Act'' complaints. A non-registered complaint can be submitted orally to any on-duty member in the station or on the road.  
 
Both types of complaints can be made through the online complaint form on the OPCC website.  
 
==== b) Step 2: Admissibility ====
 
Before investigating a complaint, the Commissioner must first determine whether it is admissible. A complaint is admissible if it is made within 12 months of  the incident, is not frivolous or vexation, and contains at least one allegation that, if proved, would constitute misconduct under section 77 of the ''Police  Act''. Complainants will be contacted to tell them whether their complaint is admissible or not. The Commissioner’s determination of admissibility cannot be appealed.  
 
Once the Commissioner determines a complaint is admissible, they will send a notice of admissibility to the complainant and to the chief constable of the department involved. The chief constable must notify the member or former member of the complaint that has been made against him or her, appoint an investigator and, depending on the circumstances of the misconduct alleged, determine whether the matter is suitable for informal resolution.  
 
'''NOTE:''' Complaints about a municipal police department’s policies or about the services it provides, rather than about a particular incident of  misconduct, may still be admissible but should be submitted under a different process. Contact the OPCC office directly about these complaints.   
 
==== c) Step 3: Informal Resolution or Mediation ====
 
A complaint may be resolved informally at any time before or during an investigation if the matter is suitable and the complainant and the police officer agree in writing to the resolution. Informal  resolution  or  mediation  is a  voluntary, confidential  process  that  provides  a  non-confrontational  opportunity  for  both parties  to  talk  to  each  other  and  hear  how  their  actions affected  the  other.  If  a complainant  does  not  want  to  meet  the  police  officer  face  to  face,  a  neutral  third party  or  professional  mediator  can  facilitate  and  help  the  parties  reach  an agreement.  Within 10  business  days  after  agreeing  to  the  proposed  informal resolution,  either  party  may  revoke  agreement  by  notifying  the  relevant  discipline authority or the Commissioner in writing.   
 
If a complainant strongly objects to his or her complaint being informally resolved, and  would  prefer  it  be  investigated  immediately,  he  or  she  should  let  the  OPCC know  and  provide  reasons. Common  reasons  include  fear  of  intimidation  by  the officer,  the  wish  to  have  it  formally  investigated  and  substantiated,  and  a  lack  of time to participate in an informal process due to economic or other circumstances. Usually  this  objection  is  sufficient  to  move  the  complaint  directly  to  the investigation step.  
5-22A  complaint  may  also  be  resolved  by  mediation.  If  the  Police  Complaint Commissioner  agrees,  a  professional  mediator  may  be  appointed  to  assist  the complainant and the officer in resolving the complaint. The mediator is selected by the administrator of the BC Mediator’ s Roster and is completely independent from any police department or the OPCC.  d)Step 4: Investigation An  investigation  into  a  misconduct  complaint  is  usually  conducted  by  the originating department’ s Professional Standards Section. The Commissioner may, ifthe  circumstances  require,  order  that  an  external  police  agency  conduct  the investigation.  The  OPCC  will  assign  the  file  to  an  analyst,  who  will  oversee  the investigation conducted by  the Professional Standards investigator and ensure that the  investigation  is  thorough,  impartial,  and  completed in  a  timely  manner.  All investigations must be completed within six months. During the investigation, the complainant  and  member  will  be  periodically  updated  about  the  investigation’ s progress. At the conclusion of the investigation, the investigator will submit a final investigation  report  to  the  discipline  authority,  who  will  then  decide  whether  the allegations are substantiated and, if so, propose corrective or disciplinary measures. What  happens  next  in  the  process  depends  on  whether  the allegations  are substantiated or not.  e)If the Complaint Is Substantiated (1)Pre-Hearing Conference If  the  discipline  authority  decides  that  the  allegation  of  misconduct  is substantiated and merits disciplinary or corrective measures, the discipline authority  may  conduct  a  confidential  prehearing  conference  with  the police  officer,  if  doing  so  is  not  contrary  to  the  public  interest.  At  the hearing,  the  officer  has  an  opportunity  admit  the  misconduct  and  accept disciplinary  or  corrective  measures.  If  the  officer  and the  discipline authority at the prehearing conference agree on disciplinary measures, and the  Commissioner  gives  his  or  her  approval,  the  matter  is  considered resolved. This resolution is final and cannot be reviewed by a court on any ground.  (2)Disciplinary Proceeding If  a  prehearing  conference  is  not  held,  or  if  it  does not  result  in  a resolution of each allegation of misconduct against the police officer, the discipline  authority  must  convene  a  disciplinary  proceeding  to  determine appropriate disciplinary or corrective measures, within 40 business days of receiving  the  final  investigation  report.  However,  the discipline  authority must cancel this proceeding if the Commissioner arranges a public hearing about                        the                        impugned                        conduct. The  complainant  must  receive  at  least  15  days’  notice  of  a  disciplinary proceeding. The complainant may provide written or oral submissions  in advance of the hearing but cannot actually attend the proceeding. The  discipline  authority  must,  if  appropriate, choose  measures  to  correct  
5-22A  complaint  may  also  be  resolved  by  mediation.  If  the  Police  Complaint Commissioner  agrees,  a  professional  mediator  may  be  appointed  to  assist  the complainant and the officer in resolving the complaint. The mediator is selected by the administrator of the BC Mediator’ s Roster and is completely independent from any police department or the OPCC.  d)Step 4: Investigation An  investigation  into  a  misconduct  complaint  is  usually  conducted  by  the originating department’ s Professional Standards Section. The Commissioner may, ifthe  circumstances  require,  order  that  an  external  police  agency  conduct  the investigation.  The  OPCC  will  assign  the  file  to  an  analyst,  who  will  oversee  the investigation conducted by  the Professional Standards investigator and ensure that the  investigation  is  thorough,  impartial,  and  completed in  a  timely  manner.  All investigations must be completed within six months. During the investigation, the complainant  and  member  will  be  periodically  updated  about  the  investigation’ s progress. At the conclusion of the investigation, the investigator will submit a final investigation  report  to  the  discipline  authority,  who  will  then  decide  whether  the allegations are substantiated and, if so, propose corrective or disciplinary measures. What  happens  next  in  the  process  depends  on  whether  the allegations  are substantiated or not.  e)If the Complaint Is Substantiated (1)Pre-Hearing Conference If  the  discipline  authority  decides  that  the  allegation  of  misconduct  is substantiated and merits disciplinary or corrective measures, the discipline authority  may  conduct  a  confidential  prehearing  conference  with  the police  officer,  if  doing  so  is  not  contrary  to  the  public  interest.  At  the hearing,  the  officer  has  an  opportunity  admit  the  misconduct  and  accept disciplinary  or  corrective  measures.  If  the  officer  and the  discipline authority at the prehearing conference agree on disciplinary measures, and the  Commissioner  gives  his  or  her  approval,  the  matter  is  considered resolved. This resolution is final and cannot be reviewed by a court on any ground.  (2)Disciplinary Proceeding If  a  prehearing  conference  is  not  held,  or  if  it  does not  result  in  a resolution of each allegation of misconduct against the police officer, the discipline  authority  must  convene  a  disciplinary  proceeding  to  determine appropriate disciplinary or corrective measures, within 40 business days of receiving  the  final  investigation  report.  However,  the discipline  authority must cancel this proceeding if the Commissioner arranges a public hearing about                        the                        impugned                        conduct. The  complainant  must  receive  at  least  15  days’  notice  of  a  disciplinary proceeding. The complainant may provide written or oral submissions  in advance of the hearing but cannot actually attend the proceeding. The  discipline  authority  must,  if  appropriate, choose  measures  to  correct  
5-23and educate officers rather than measures intended to blame and punish. Unless  the  Police Complaints  Commissioner  orders  a  public hearing,  the resolution is final. f)If the Complaint Is Not Substantiated  (1)Retired Judge Previously,  only  a  police  commissioner  would  review  the  file.  However, complainants  can  now  request  that  the  Commissioner  appoint  a  retired judge  to  review  the  file  and  determine  whether  or  not  the  decision  was correct.  The  complainant  must  make  the  request  in  writing  within 10 business  days  of  receiving  the  discipline  authority’ s  decision.  It  is  now common to have a retired judge review the file in less serious cases. Note that  there  is  a  more  realistic  chance  of  success  when  the  commission appoints a retired judge. For further information, please see: http://www.opcc.bc.ca.  g)Public HearingThe  Office  of  the  Police  Complaint  Commissioner  (“OPCC”) can  order  public hearings  into  matters  involving  misconduct  by  municipal  police  officers  in  British Columbia.  After  the  investigation  into  the  complaint has  concluded,  the complainant or the police officer may request a public hearing within 20 business days of receiving notice of the decision, or the OPCC may initiate a public hearing itself  if a public  hearing  is  necessary  in  the  public  interest.  In Florkow  v  British Columbia  (Police  Complaint  Commissioner),  2013  BCCA  92,  the  BC  Court  of  Appeal found  that  under  the  current Police  Act  the  OPCC  can  only  hold  a  public  hearing after  certain  stages  of  the  complaint  process —  after  the  discipline  authority  has concluded its investigation, after the retired judge has reviewed the file, or after the disciplinary proceeding. (1)Test for Ordering Public Hearing In deciding whether such a hearing is necessary in the public interest, the Police  Complaints  Commissioner  must  consider  all  relevant  factors, including: the nature and seriousness of the complaint; the  nature  and  seriousness  of  the  alleged  harm  caused  by  the  police officer,  including  whether  the  officer’ s  conduct  has  undermined public confidence in the police or its disciplinary processes; whether a public hearing would assist in ascertaining the truth; whether  a  case  can  be  made  that  the  investigation  was  flawed,  the proposed  disciplinary  measures  are  inappropriate, or  the  discipline authority incorrectly interpreted the law.
5-23and educate officers rather than measures intended to blame and punish. Unless  the  Police Complaints  Commissioner  orders  a  public hearing,  the resolution is final. f)If the Complaint Is Not Substantiated  (1)Retired Judge Previously,  only  a  police  commissioner  would  review  the  file.  However, complainants  can  now  request  that  the  Commissioner  appoint  a  retired judge  to  review  the  file  and  determine  whether  or  not  the  decision  was correct.  The  complainant  must  make  the  request  in  writing  within 10 business  days  of  receiving  the  discipline  authority’ s  decision.  It  is  now common to have a retired judge review the file in less serious cases. Note that  there  is  a  more  realistic  chance  of  success  when  the  commission appoints a retired judge. For further information, please see: http://www.opcc.bc.ca.  g)Public HearingThe  Office  of  the  Police  Complaint  Commissioner  (“OPCC”) can  order  public hearings  into  matters  involving  misconduct  by  municipal  police  officers  in  British Columbia.  After  the  investigation  into  the  complaint has  concluded,  the complainant or the police officer may request a public hearing within 20 business days of receiving notice of the decision, or the OPCC may initiate a public hearing itself  if a public  hearing  is  necessary  in  the  public  interest.  In Florkow  v  British Columbia  (Police  Complaint  Commissioner),  2013  BCCA  92,  the  BC  Court  of  Appeal found  that  under  the  current Police  Act  the  OPCC  can  only  hold  a  public  hearing after  certain  stages  of  the  complaint  process —  after  the  discipline  authority  has concluded its investigation, after the retired judge has reviewed the file, or after the disciplinary proceeding. (1)Test for Ordering Public Hearing In deciding whether such a hearing is necessary in the public interest, the Police  Complaints  Commissioner  must  consider  all  relevant  factors, including: the nature and seriousness of the complaint; the  nature  and  seriousness  of  the  alleged  harm  caused  by  the  police officer,  including  whether  the  officer’ s  conduct  has  undermined public confidence in the police or its disciplinary processes; whether a public hearing would assist in ascertaining the truth; whether  a  case  can  be  made  that  the  investigation  was  flawed,  the proposed  disciplinary  measures  are  inappropriate, or  the  discipline authority incorrectly interpreted the law.
Retrieved from "https://wiki.clicklaw.bc.ca/index.php?title=Special:MobileDiff/29068"