Rowley: Officials ‘dragging feet' over calls for powers to sack rogue officers

Independent

12-02-2025

The head of Britain's biggest police force blamed Home Office officials for failing to give him stronger powers to sack rogue officers.
The Metropolitan Police is set to challenge a High Court ruling that it cannot sack officers by removing their vetting clearance.
Scotland Yard chief Sir Mark Rowley said he had been lobbying the Government to give him a different mechanism to sack officers who were unfit to wear the uniform.
He said successive home secretaries had promised action but 'I could see officials were being slow and not getting on with it'.
He said that left him with 'no choice but to use the existing regulations and what is a very, very untested process, so I always knew we'd be legally challenged'.
Sir Mark told BBC Radio 4's Today programme: 'Throughout this whole process, I've seen complete commitment and support from Suella Braverman, James Cleverly and Yvette Cooper to get this fixed.
'I'm disappointed that officials have dragged their feet.'
He added: 'It's only in the last few days they've actually started listening to us about what's required to fix this, so that we can deal expeditiously and properly with people who aren't fit to wear the uniform.'
The Home Office insisted it was 'acting rapidly' to introduce new rules to help forces sack officers who could not hold vetting – an official system used to assess someone's suitability to work for the police.
Throughout this whole process, I've seen complete commitment and support from Suella Braverman, James Cleverly and Yvette Cooper to get this fixed. I'm disappointed that officials have dragged their feet
Sir Mark Rowley
Without a legal mechanism to sack them, Sir Mark said millions of pounds was being wasted paying officers he cannot get rid of.
'It's a ridiculous waste of taxpayers' money paying someone (to) sit at home, but they won't be policing the streets, they won't be attending your calls,' he said.
The Met began reviewing allegations against officers and staff in the wake of public outrage over Wayne Couzens and David Carrick, who committed violent sexual crimes while serving as Met officers.
The first, Operation Assure, looked at the vetting of officers and staff where concerns had been raised about their behaviour.
The second, Operation Onyx, looked at every completed sexual offence or domestic abuse case involving a police officer or staff member between April 2012 and April 2022, where the allegation did not lead to them being sacked.
There are currently 29 officers who have had their vetting removed who remain on paid leave, and 96 who have been sacked or resigned.
It is thought that keeping officers and staff on paid special vetting leave will cost at least £2 million per year.
If the Met is forced to reinstate another 24 officers previously sacked for failing to meet vetting standards, this cost could be as high as £7 million per year.
But Tuesday's High Court judgment effectively removed a mechanism to sack officers who were not fit to hold vetting.
Sergeant Lino Di Maria successfully mounted a legal challenge, supported by the Metropolitan Police Federation, after having his vetting removed over sexual assault allegations, which he denies.
He was found to have no case to answer in respect of misconduct allegations, and argued that having his vetting removed without the accusations being proved is a breach of his right to a fair trial.
Sgt Di Maria – who joined the force in 2004 – was accused of rape in 2019, and a second allegation was made in 2021, with the incident said to have happened in 2015.
A complaint was also made in 2021 that the officer had been inappropriate towards female colleagues.
No criminal charges were brought because of insufficient evidence, and Sgt Di Maria was found to have no case to answer for misconduct.
A Home Office spokesman said: 'It is essential for public confidence in policing that the strictest standards are upheld and maintained. Individuals who fall below the high standards the public expects should not be police officers.
'That's why this Government is acting rapidly to introduce new, strengthened rules that will help forces dismiss officers who cannot maintain vetting clearance.
'There are clear processes already in place for forces to deal with any officer found facing allegations of misconduct, and it is critical that they use these to remove personnel who clearly fall short of the standards that we and the public expect.'
In the ruling on Tuesday, Mrs Justice Lang found that Scotland Yard cannot lawfully dismiss officers by withdrawing their vetting clearance.
She continued: 'Dismissal is a matter which should be provided for in regulations made by the Secretary of State… This results in an anomalous situation where officers who do not have basic vetting clearance cannot be dismissed by the defendant.
'In my view, that anomaly could and should be resolved by regulations.'