Part 2: Police Complaints, Discipline and Inspection Chapter 4: Police Discipline Section 30: Police barred list and police advisory list
Section 30 and Schedule 8 combined create a new statutory list of persons barred from policing called the "Police Barred List", held by the College of Policing. The provisions also create a "Police Advisory List", which will include details of individuals who are under investigation for matters which could lead to their dismissal at the time that they resign or retire from the force, pending the outcome of the investigation or disciplinary proceedings. If the individual receives a finding of dismissal they will be added to the Police Barred List, if there is a lesser finding or no disciplinary proceedings are brought, the individual’s details will be removed. The advisory list will also include police volunteers designated with policing powers who have been dismissed. The creation of these lists is achieved by inserting new Part 4A into the 1996 Act, which sets out the various provisions and requirements on those affected. The provisions created by new Part 4A require that any dismissals from a police force are reported to the College of Policing, which will hold this information and maintain a list of people barred from policing activity. Any person on this list will be prevented from being employed by or appointed to a position in a police force, the IPCC, HMIC and any other organisation specified in regulations.
	An example of how these provisions will work in practice is below.
Example 1
Police constable X is alleged to have committed gross misconduct through excessive use of force against an individual in his custody. The matter is investigated by the force's professional standards department, at the conclusion of which a report into the incident is produced, followed by the decision that PC X has a case to answer in relation to gross misconduct and a public misconduct hearing takes place. The hearing panel, chaired by an independent legally-qualified chair, determines that PC X has committed gross misconduct and is dismissed without notice for the offence.
The appropriate authority provides a report to the College of Policing including the officer’s name, rank, date of birth, warrant card number and details of conduct that led to the dismissal. PC X is added to the police barred list.
The officer’s name and details of the case are made publically available for a period of five years.
	Subsection (1) introduces Schedule 8, which inserts a new Part 4A (comprising sections 88A to 88M) into the 1996 Act, which includes the duties, procedures and provisions related to the administration and maintenance of the police barred list (sections 88A to 88H) and the police advisory list (sections 88I to 88M), as well as the effects of being an individual included on the lists or removal from them. Subsections (3) to (5) make consequential amendments to the 2011 Act to ensure that a person who appears on the police barred list cannot be appointed as the Commissioner or Deputy Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police or a chief constable.
	Subsection (6) allows the Secretary of State to make regulations containing similar provisions to Schedule 8 for policing/law enforcement bodies not captured by Schedule 8, which will include, for example, non-Home Department Police Forces such as the British Transport Police, Civil Nuclear Constabulary and Ministry of Defence Police, as well as the National Crime Agency.
	New section 88A of the 1996 Act creates a duty for the 'relevant authority'5 to report a member of a police force or a special constable where he or she is dismissed, or there is a finding that he or she would have been dismissed had he or she not resigned or retired (subsection (1)(a) and (b)). Subsection (1)(c) and (d) makes corresponding provision for civilian staff6. A report must be made within such period as is specified in regulations and must include such information as is so specified (subsection (2)).
	New sections 88I to 88M create similar provisions for the police advisory list. New section 88I requires the relevant authority to report a person to the College of Policing if the individual resigns or retires whilst under investigation for misconduct related matters which could lead to dismissal or before the disciplinary process concludes; or where an allegation relating to misconduct is received within a set period of time of an individual leaving the force. The duty to report the officer to the College of Policing will therefore only apply where there is an ongoing investigation. The period will be set out in regulations and is expected to be 12 months. This list is effectively an interim list to record information about people who resign or retire while under investigation or subject to proceedings. Once that process has concluded, if the person would have been dismissed, they are effectively transferred to the barred list, however if the matter is not proven or does not amount to gross misconduct they are simply removed from the police advisory list.
	The police advisory list does not bar a person from being appointed but is made available for vetting purposes (new section 88K) should the individual seek employment with another policing body identified in new section 88K(3) (including chief constables, PCCs, HMIC and the IPCC) and as specified in regulations made by virtue of new section 88C(5)(e). These bodies are under a duty to consult the police advisory list before appointing or employing a person. A further report detailing whether misconduct liable to lead to dismissal was proven or no case was found is required where it is determined that no disciplinary proceedings will be brought, where the proceedings are withdrawn or where they conclude without a finding that the individual would have been dismissed (new section 88L). By virtue of section 41, police volunteers who are found to have committed gross misconduct will also be captured on the police advisory list.
Example 2
Inspector B is alleged to have committed gross misconduct by failing to respond appropriately to an incident and effectively exercise his duties, and subsequently including false and misleading information in written accounts and subsequent interviews.
An investigation is initiated by the force professional standards department. However, in the early stages of the investigation Inspector B resigns from the force.
On receipt of the letter of resignation, the chief constable provides a report to the College of Policing that Inspector B has resigned whilst under investigation. This information is held on the police advisory list pending the conclusion of the investigation and any subsequent proceedings. It is available for vetting purposes.
The investigation continues and, at its conclusion, a report into the incident is made, followed by the decision that Inspector B has a case to answer in relation to counts of gross misconduct.
During this time, Inspector B has sought to apply for a position of similar rank with a neighbouring force. During the course of the recruitment process, the neighbouring force contacts the College of Policing as part of the vetting process. The force considers the information provided by the College and decides not to appoint Inspector B.
A public misconduct hearing finds that Inspector B has committed one count of gross misconduct and a further count of misconduct and makes a finding that had he still been serving, he would have been dismissed without notice for the offence.
The chief constable provides a further report to the College of Policing including the former inspector’s name, rank, date of birth, warrant card number and details of conduct that led to the dismissal. Inspector B is added to the police barred list.
	New section 88B places a duty on the College of Policing to maintain a list of people who are reported to it under new section 88A (subsection (1)) and for that list of individuals to be known as the police barred list (subsection (2)). Subsection (3) sets out that the list must include such information in relation to a person reported under section 88A as is specified in regulations (subsection (4)).
	New section 88C sets out the effects and consequences of being included on the police barred list, that is, being a "barred person". New section 88C(2) places a requirement on certain individuals and bodies (subsection (5)) including chief officers and local policing bodies, HMIC and the IPCC to consult the police barred list before employing or appointing any person. Subsection (3) prohibits those individuals and bodies from employing or appointing a barred person. New section 88C(5)(e) allows regulations to specify additional persons or bodies which carry out policing or law enforcement functions who must not appoint barred persons to those organisations. This is to prevent individuals who have been dismissed from policing from undertaking similar roles or functions similar to that of police in other organisations. New section 88K sets out the effects of inclusion on the police advisory list. Inclusion on the list does not bar a person from being appointed or employed by a policing body. However, the bodies named above are required to consult the police advisory list as part of their vetting process.
	Subsection (3) and (4)of section 30 places a similar duty on the Home Secretary not to recommend to Her Majesty the appointment of a person as commissioner and deputy commissioner of the Metropolitan Police if that person has been barred from policing. Subsection (5) in turn places a similar duty on PCCs in respect of the appointment of chief constables for police forces outside of London.
	New section 88D places similar duties to those imposed by new section 88C on organisations which carry out both policing/law enforcement functions, as well as other functions and who are identified in regulations made under new section 88C(5)(e). This is to ensure that if an individual is to be transferred internally or seconded to a role which relates to policing or law enforcement functions, the organisation must check with the College of Policing before making the appointment (subsection (4)). For example, if a person was carrying out a back-office or non-public function not related to policing and law enforcement but sought to transfer to a front-line or operational role which meets the specified criteria and is on the barred list, they could not take up that role or carry out those functions. New section 88E prohibits a chief constable, local policing bodies and others (new section 88C(5)) from entering into contracts which would permit a barred person from carrying out a role from which they would be barred if they were directly employed. It is expected that contracts between police forces and private sector providers of policing related services will include standard conditions to prevent barred persons from being engaged as part of such a contract.
	New section 88F sets out the process for removal of an individual’s name from the police barred list where an individual has been successful upon appeal to the Police Appeals Tribunal (subsection (1)(a) and (b)) or following a finding of unfair dismissal (subsection (1)(c) and (d)) on appeal or by an employment tribunal.
	The relevant authority must report such decision/finding to the College of Policing (subsection (2)), within a period of time and containing information to be specified in regulations (subsection (3)). Subsection (4) requires the College of Policing to remove the person from the list where such a report is received. Subsection (5) allows regulations to set out other circumstances in which a person's name must be removed from the police barred list. New section 88L creates similar provisions for an individual to be removed from the police advisory list where it is found that the person had not committed gross misconduct and would not have been dismissed (subsection (1)) or in other circumstances specified in regulations (subsection (6) and (7)). In these circumstances, the relevant authority must make a report to the College of Policing (subsection (2)) within such period and containing such information as specified in regulations (subsection (3)). New section 88G makes provision regarding the publication of information on the police barred list. If information which appears on the police barred list is of a description specified in regulations, and relates to a description of person so specified, the College must publish it (subsections (1) and (2)). The intention is to specify only certain information relating to members of police forces and special constables and former members of police forces and former special constables (that is, not civilian staff). The period of publication is limited to five years from the date the individual is added to the list (subsection (3)(c)) after which the details must no longer be published (subsection (3)(d)).
	New subsection 88G(4) allows for regulations to be made making exceptions to the publication requirements. As set out in subsection (5), these regulations may stipulate that information should never be published (subsection (5)(a)) or that information should cease to be published before the end of the five year period (subsection (5)(b)). This may be appropriate in certain limited circumstances, these may, for example, include following the death of an individual on the barred list or in response to a court order.
	New section 88H allows the College of Policing to disclose to any person information contained on the police barred list, where it considers that to be in the public interest. This provision is replicated for the police advisory list in section 88M.