Complaint Committee - Terms of Reference

For the purposes of this policy:

1.1 'the Department' will represent the entire organisation as an entity: the Paralake Police Department; and

1.2 'Colleague(s)' refers to any person(s) involved in the activities of the Department either directly or indirectly; and

1.3 'Chiefs of Department' refers to both the Chief of Department and Deputy Chief of Department jointly, and can be inferred as either both at the same time or one or the other; and

1.4 'Line Manager' refers to any person who is the head of one of either Operation Services or Professional Standards, ordinarily holding the rank of Major, or at the very least directly reports to the Office of Chiefs of Department; and

1.5 'Commanding Officer' refers to any person who is the head of a command/division, ordinarily holding the rank of Captain, or at the very least directly reports to a Major or the Office of Chiefs of Department; and

1.6 'Command Member' refers to any person who directly reports to a Commanding Officer, ordinarily holding the rank of Lieutenant or Staff Sergeant; and

1.7 'Complainant' refers to the original creator of an Internal Affairs complaint; and

1.8 'Defendant' refers to any named individual on an Internal Affairs complaint who is accused of breaching policy and/or law.

2.1 The Complaint Committee is commissioned by the Office of Chiefs of Department to provide final decisions on complaints lodged against PLPD personnel through the Internal Affairs system.

2.2 Final decisions include: sustained, exonerated, not sustained, or unfounded. If a complaint is sustained, the Complaint Committee will also decide on the most appropriate action to be taken.

2.3 The Office of Chiefs of Department and the Head of Professional Standards tasks the appointed Chairperson with the responsibility of effective management of the day-to-day processes of the Complaint Committee.

2.4 The Complaint Committee should not be driven by any priorities or objectives designed for the wider Department, and should also not work purely to meet the Office of Chiefs of Department’s strategic objectives. Instead, the Complaint Committee should focus entirely on the matter that is before them in the context of any potential breach of policies or laws applicable, as they are written.

3.1 The Complaint Committee has a number of objectives which must be duly considered during all of its proceedings to ensure that all final decisions taken are fair and equitable, and comply with the appropriate standards. These are namely:

3.2 Proportionality: final decisions made are proportionate to the offence committed in the context of the policy and/or law that has been breached, the perceived intention of the Defendant, and the level of harm committed.

3.3 Equity: final decisions are only made where it is clear that the Internal Affairs process has given ample opportunity for both the Complainant and the Defendant to make representations on their behalf.

3.4 Impartiality: final decisions are only made based on the individual merits of the case and the evidence submitted and not on any preconceived notions or opinions against any involved party.

3.5 Relevance: the purpose for which final decisions are made purely based on whether any laws or policies applicable were breached as they are written. Final decisions are not for deciding whether any actions taken were ‘morally’ or ‘ethically’ right, or if a management decision was the most effective course of action.

3.6 Completeness: any complaint submitted must be given ample and due consideration in a meeting and have a sufficient discussion of its merits. Final decisions made should also be clear on what policies and/or laws have been breached and how they have come to be breached.

3.7 Timeliness: complaints receive a final decision in a timely fashion and are not delayed beyond what can be reasonably controlled by the Complaint Committee, with the ultimate aim of providing a final decision within a week of the final report being submitted.

3.8 All of the above objectives are considered in all of the Complaint Committee’s processes to ensure that final decisions taken and the overall outcome of complaints are of the level of quality required to meet their purposes.

4.1 The Complaint Committee has the authority to provide final decisions and take appropriate action only where there has been a clear and defined breach of policy and/or law as they are written. This includes both the acts and omissions of the Defendant.

4.2 The Complaint Committee must utilise an objective test and only consider the policy and/or law as it is, and not attempt to provide alternative interpretations on what it could mean. Additionally, the Complaint Committee must not attempt to apply any policy and/or law whilst considering what the policy-maker or law-maker intended when they were writing said policy and/or law.

4.3 The Complaint Committee should not cast judgement on any acts or omissions which pertain to a management decision, unless there has been a clear and defined breach of policy and/or law. Any questions of morals, ethics, or efficiency are matters for the ordinary chain-of-command and not for the Complaint Committee.

4.4 The Complaint Committee has the authority to provide final decisions and take appropriate action against any and all colleagues, regardless of rank or division, with a few limitations that must be observed. These are namely:

4.5 Action against the Chiefs of Department: any action to be taken against the Chiefs of Department must be done so in consultation with Server Ownership. The Complaint Committee may determine the outcome of a complaint but is not permitted to impose disciplinary action without approval.

4.6 Action against a Line Manager: any action to be taken against any of the Line Managers must be done so in consultation with the Chiefs of Department. The Complaint Committee may determine the outcome of a complaint but is not permitted to impose disciplinary action without approval.

4.7 Where a complaint has been sustained against a Defendant who currently holds the rank of Civilian or is no longer a member of the Department, the Complaint Committee may choose instead to extend any existing punishment.

5.1 The Complaint Committee has a number of "standing members" who must always endeavour to attend a meeting wherever possible, namely:

5.2 The Chief of Department; and

5.3 The Deputy Chief of Department; and

5.4 The Chairperson of the Complaint Committee; and

5.5 Professional Standards Members; and

5.6 Commanding Officers of Operations Services.

5.7 The Complaint Committee is also permitted to invite "additional members" to its proceedings for the purpose of making final decisions. These additional members are decided upon solely by the Chairperson of the Complaint Committee, the Head of Professional Standards and the Office of Chiefs of Department and are namely:

5.8 Command Members of Operations Services, including Lieutenants and Staff Sergeants; and

5.9 Any other current employee of the Department, regardless of rank or division, of whom the Chairperson of the Complaint Committee, the Head of Professional Standards and the Chiefs of Department are of the opinion would make positive contributions.

6.1 The Complaint Committee is an integral part of a Department-wide process that seeks to improve the quality of both operational and non-operational work. As it is entirely reliant on the attendance of its members to its sittings, it is vital that both standing and additional members seek to be present at Complaint Committee meetings regularly.

6.2 Where the Office of Chiefs of Department and the Head of Professional Standards are of the opinion that the attendance or hosting levels of the Chairperson of the Complaint Committee is falling below satisfactory levels, then they reserve the right to expunge the Chairperson of their position and appoint a new Chairperson at their sole discretion and behest.

6.3 If the Chairperson of the Complaint Committee also holds leadership responsibility within the Department, then the Office of Chiefs of Department and the Head of Professional Standards reserve the right to initiate a Performance Disciplinary process alongside the expulsion.

6.4 Where the Office of Chiefs of Department, Head of Professional Standards and the Chairperson of the Complaint Committee are of the opinion that the attendance or hosting levels of a senior member of the Complaint Committee is falling below satisfactory levels, then they reserve the right to expunge said member's seniority and return them to the level of junior member.

6.5 Where the Office of Chiefs of Department, Head of Professional Standards and the Chairperson of the Complaint Committee are of the opinion that the attendance of any standing member is falling below satisfactory levels, then they reserve the right to initiate a Performance Disciplinary process whereby said standing member's ordinary Department rank will be at risk.

6.6 Where the Office of Chiefs of Department, the Head of Professional Standards and the Chairperson of the Complaint Committee are of the opinion that the attendance of any additional member is falling below satisfactory levels, then they reserve the right to expunge said additional member from the Complaint Committee and prevent them from re-joining for any period of time.

6.7 Reasonable exemptions for non-attendance may be granted at the sole discretion and behest of the Office of Chiefs of Department and the Head of Professional Standards, such as: any pre-agreed Leave of Absences; illness; or emergency situations. However, the Office of Chiefs of Department and the Head of Professional Standards reserve the right to initiate a Performance Disciplinary process for the member in-question for repeated non-attendance, if it is deemed that this also impacts their other Departmental responsibilities.

6.8 The Performance Disciplinary process is defined in its own policy which can be found by clicking here.

7.1 In order for a meeting of the Complaint Committee to be held, the required quorum must be met, which is a minimum of one Senior Complaint Committee Member and two additional members or alternatively two Senior Complaint Committee Members or one Senior Complaint Committee Member and the Chairperson of the Complaint Committee.

7.2 An exception to the above is where the Defendant is ranked Officer or below. In such a case, then only one Senior Complaint Committee Member and one additional member is required in-order for a meeting to take place.

7.3 The Office of Chiefs of Department and the Head of Professional Standards may also host a meeting where they are of the opinion that it is appropriate to do so with a minimum of three additional members, whereby they will adjudicate to ensure proper and due process is followed but will not vote. Any such meeting will be considered to be an ‘Emergency Meeting’.

8.1 There are four possible outcomes that can be voted on by the Complaint Committee, namely:

8.2 Sustained: the alleged act(s) or omission(s) occurred and the Defendant has breached policy and/or law, and there is sufficient evidence to support this.

8.3 Exonerated: the alleged act(s) or omission(s) occurred but the Defendant has not breached policy and/or law, instead their actions were justified, legal and/or proper.

8.4 Not Sustained: the investigation did not produce sufficient information to prove or disprove the allegation, or demonstrate whether the alleged act(s) or omission(s) did in-fact occur.

8.5 Unfounded: the investigation has conclusively found that the alleged act(s) or omission(s) did not occur, and there is sufficient evidence to support this. 

9.1 In-order for a final decision to be made a system of simple plurality is used. This means that the outcome and/or disciplinary action only requires one more member to vote on it, and does not require an overall majority. Each individual vote for an outcome and/or disciplinary action must be justified during the voting process.

9.2 There are three types of disciplinary action which can be enforced upon a Defendant that do not require approval from the Office of Chiefs of Department or the Head of Professional Standards:

9.3 Corrective Action: this can include a comment card, talk with Professional Standards, mentoring, supervised patrol, or any other form of corrective action deemed necessary.

9.4 Reprimand: a reprimand stays on a Defendant’s record for 30 calendar days.

9.5 Written Warning: a written warning stays on a Defendant’s record permanently.

9.6 There are also two additional types of disciplinary action which can be enforced upon a Defendant, however these both require approval from the Office of Chiefs of Department or the Head of Professional Standards if the Defendant is ranked Corporal or above:

9.7 Demotion: this includes demotion to one rank below and any further demotions if deemed necessary.

9.8 Dishonourable Discharge: a total removal from the Department which may also include a blacklist (no-return period).

10.1 Every meeting of the Complaint Committee must be recorded in full without omissions or redactions. A copy must then be supplied to: the Chairperson of the Complaint Committee; the Chief of Department; the Deputy Chief of Department; and the Head of Professional Standards, who will act as custodians. There are no exceptions to the requirement of recordings.

10.2 Meetings of the Complaint Committee should ordinarily be announced through the PLPD shoutbox prior to said meeting taking place. Where the Chairperson of the Complaint Committee is of the opinion that it is not appropriate to do so, then a meeting need not be announced.

10.3 Members of the Complaint Committee who had any level of involvement in a complaint must mute and deafen while deliberations and voting on said complaint take place, and they are not permitted to vote on said complaint. If a member is uncertain of whether the nature of their involvement would preclude them from deliberating or voting on said complaint then they should seek advice from either the Chairperson of the Complaint Committee or the Office of Chiefs of Department or the Head Professional Standards.

10.4 Where it transpires through the submitted evidence that a violation of the Server Rules has taken place and the Defendant has relied on that fact in their defence, then it is at the discretion of the Complaint Committee as to whether they choose to exonerate the complaint.

10.5 The attendance and voting, whether intention or actual, of members of the Complaint Committee is strictly confidential and should not be shared with any party.

10.6 As per Section 3, it must be appreciated that being an officer is voluntary and requires a lot of time to be placed into the Department. Officers should be able to have a degree of fun whilst on-duty. Disciplinary actions should always err on the side of leniency unless the Defendant has an infraction for a similar incident, or their record is poor.

10.7 The experience of the Defendant and their record of at least the previous 3 calendar months, as well as any recent promotions or achievements, should be taken into account when deciding on the disciplinary action to be taken. The degree of harm caused to the Complainant and any other third-parties, as well as the perceived intention of the Defendant, must also be duly considered.

10.8 Where it transpires through the submitted evidence that another colleague, who is not a named Defendant or person on the complaint, is found or seen to be breaching policy and/or law, then it is at the discretion of the Complaint Committee as to whether they choose to enforce disciplinary action against said colleague.

11.1 Any Defendant, regardless of rank or division, reserves the right to appeal a decision of the Complaint Committee through the defined process that has been laid out by the Department. Defendants may only appeal a decision once, unless they are bringing forward new evidence which has not been seen before.

11.2 Complainants, regardless of rank or division, reserve the right to appeal an outcome, that was a decision of the Complaint Committee, by contacting Professional Standards via the helpdesk. It is of the discretion of Professional Standards to determine whether a complaint's outcome should be revoted on by the Complaint Committee. Complainants may only appeal a decision once.

11.3 Continued aggravation or repeated attempts at disrupting any processes by a Complainant will make them subject to disciplinary action at the sole discretion and behest of the Office of Chiefs of Department.

11.4 Internal Affairs Investigators, regardless of seniority or level of experience, are not granted any right to appeal a decision of the Complaint Committee. However, they may request additional information from the Complaint Committee as to why a particular outcome and/or disciplinary action was taken to assist their future investigations.

11.5 The Appeals process is defined within its own policy, which can be found by clicking here.