Part 2: Police Complaints, Discipline and Inspection Chapter 4: Police Discipline Section 29: Disciplinary proceedings: former members of police forces and former special constables
Section 50 of the 1996 Act provides a power to make regulations with respect to "the conduct, efficiency and effectiveness of members of police forces and the maintenance of discipline". Section 51 provides a power to make similar provision in respect of special constables. In exercise of these powers, the Police (Conduct) Regulations 2012 (2012/2632) prescribe, amongst other matters, the standards of professional behaviour for officers and special constables and procedures for investigating breaches of these standards and any subsequent disciplinary proceedings. These provisions do not apply to civilian police staff as their conditions of service and procedures linked to their conduct and performance are set locally and administered by individual forces.
	The existing legislation applies to serving members of police forces and serving special constables and therefore ceases to apply when the person has left the force through retirement or resignation. At present, existing regulations (regulation 10A of the Police (Conduct) Regulations 2012 (2012/2632)) stipulate that any of member of a police force or special constable who is under investigation or subject to disciplinary proceedings may not resign or retire whilst those proceedings are ongoing, unless there are exceptional circumstances.
	Subsection (2) inserts new subsections (3A) to (3G) into section 50 of the 1996 Act, which allow for the procedures concerning disciplinary proceedings which apply to serving officers of police forces to be extended to former members of police forces in certain circumstances. New subsection (3A) sets out that regulations may provide for those procedures to apply to former officers where an allegation comes to the attention of a chief officer of police, local policing body or IPCC which relates to the individual's conduct, efficiency or effectiveness whilst he or she was serving with the police and the condition in new subsection (3B), (3C) or (3D) is satisfied.
	The condition in new subsection (3B) is that the allegation comes to the attention of the chief officer (or other body) prior to the individual leaving the force. The condition in new subsection (3C) is that the allegation comes to the attention of the chief officer (or other body) after the individual leaves the force, but within a prescribed period of time after the individual has left. It is intended that this period, which will be prescribed in regulations, will be 12 months.
	The condition in new subsection (3D) is that the allegation comes to the attention of the chief officer (or other body) after the individual leaves the force, and after the expiry of the prescribed period referred to above, but the allegation is such that, if proved, the person could have been dealt with by dismissal had he or she not left the force. Regulations made to deal with these cases are required by new subsection (3E) to provide that disciplinary proceedings may only be brought where the IPCC determines that it would be reasonable and proportionate to do so. In making that determination, the IPCC will have regard to: (a) the seriousness of the alleged misconduct, inefficiency or ineffectiveness, (b) the impact of the allegation on public confidence in the police; and (c) the public interest. New subsection (3F) provides that regulations may be made concerning the matters to be taken into account by the IPCC for the purposes of new subsection (3E)(a)-(c). These provisions are intended to capture the most serious and exceptional cases, where due to their nature and circumstances there is a need for accountability irrespective of when the matter has come to light.
	New subsection (3G) states that regulations must provide that where disciplinary proceedings against a former officer are not the first set of proceedings taken against the person, they may only be taken if they result from a re-investigation of the allegation which commences within a prescribed period (beginning with the person's resignation or retirement). It is intended that this period, which will be prescribed in regulations, will be 12 months.
	Subsection (3) replicates these provisions for former special constables.
	These changes will mean that disciplinary proceedings can take place after the person concerned has left the force. In such cases, if the individual’s conduct is found to amount to gross misconduct then, although he or she cannot be dismissed (having already left the force), a finding could be made that he or she would have been dismissed and, as a consequence, his or her name would be placed on the police barred list (see Schedule 8). These changes will allow for the removal of the current restrictions on those under investigation or subject to disciplinary proceedings (regulation 10A of the Police (Conduct) Regulations 2012).
	Examples of how these provisions will work in practice are provided below.
Example 1:
Sergeant G is alleged to have committed gross misconduct because of offensive and inappropriate language used against a member of the public on social media, following an incident on-duty.
The investigation commences and a report into the incident is made, followed by the decision that Sergeant G has a case to answer for gross misconduct. Following the case to answer decision Sergeant G resigns from the force and the proceedings continue.
The disciplinary process concludes with a public misconduct hearing taking place, which former Sergeant G attends. The hearing panel finds former Sergeant G guilty of gross misconduct. Former Sergeant G is reported to the College of Policing so that his name can be entered onto the police barred list.
Example 2:
Superintendent K retires from her police force. Two months later it comes to light that Superintendent K submitted fraudulent expense claims over a period of five years, totalling several thousand pounds.
The force launches an investigation into the issue and finds there is a case to answer for gross misconduct and so arranges a misconduct hearing which former Superintendent K attends. At the hearing the panel finds that the counts are proven and had former Superintendent K still been serving, she would have been dismissed. Former Superintendent K is reported to the College of Policing so that her name can be entered onto the police barred list.
	Subsections (4), (5) and (6) amend provisions relating to representation at disciplinary or appeal proceedings, appeals against dismissal and Police Appeals Tribunals respectively so that they apply to former members of police forces and former special constables.
	Subsection (7) makes transitional provisions. It sets out, first, that regulations made under the new section 50(3A) or 51(2B) of the 1996 Act may not make provision regarding a person who resigns or retires before the coming into force of the relevant subsection. Second, it sets out that regulations may make provision for cases where the alleged misconduct took place before the commencement of the relevant subsection (but where the person resigns or retires after the coming into force of the subsection) only if the alleged misconduct is such that, if proved, there could be a finding that the person would have been dismissed had he or she not resigned or retired. Subsection (8) and Schedule 7 provide for the provisions of section 29 to be replicated for non-Home Department police forces (the Ministry of Defence Police, the British Transport Police and the Civil Nuclear Constabulary), which are governed by separate legislation.