Police complaints, investigations and misconduct - legislation proposals: consultation analysis

5.2 Appendix B: Detailed quantitative analysis

This section summarises the volumes of responses by consultation question.

5.2.1 1.1A: Do you agree that there should be a statutory requirement for Police Scotland to have a Code of Ethics?

Respondent type	Yes	No	Don't know
Individual	26	4	2
Organisation	10	2	0
All responses	36	6	2

Note: Total respondents = 44

5.2.2 1.1C: Should it be possible to amend and/or update any statutory Code of Ethics when required?

Respondent type	Yes	No	Don't know
Individual	24	3	3
Organisation	11	1	0
All responses	35	4	3

Note: Total respondents = 42

5.2.3 1.1D: If Police Scotland is required by law to have a Code of Ethics, who should be responsible for preparing that Code of Ethics?

Respondent type	Chief Constable of Police Scotland	Scottish Police Authority (SPA)	The Chief Constable and SPA jointly	Other	Don't know
Individual	1	1	8	19	3
Organisation	1	1	8	1	0
All responses	2	2	16	20	3

Note: Total respondents = 43

5.2.4 1.1E: If Police Scotland is required by law to have a Code of Ethics, should whoever is responsible for its preparation (as per question 1.1D above) be required to consult on it?

Respondent type	Yes	No	Don't know
Individual	26	2	3
Organisation	11	1	0
All responses	37	3	3

Note: Total respondents = 43

5.2.5 1.1G: If Police Scotland is required by law to have a Code of Ethics, should the body (or bodies) responsible for its preparation (as per question 1.1D above) be responsible for publishing that Code of Ethics?

Respondent type	Yes	No	Don't know
Individual	24	3	3
Organisation	12	0	0
All responses	36	3	3

Note: Total respondents = 42

5.2.6 1.2A: To what extent do you agree or disagree that there should be an explicit statutory duty of candour on the police to co-operate fully with all investigations into allegations against its officers?

Respondent type	Strongly agree	Agree	Neither agree nor disagree	Disagree	Strongly disagree
Individual	21	5	1	0	2
Organisation	8	2	2	0	1
All responses	29	7	3	0	3

Note: Total respondents = 42

5.2.7 1.2B: If an explicit statutory duty of candour is to be placed on the police, should this be on the police as an organisation or on individual officers?

Respondent type	Both Police Scotland as an organisation and individual officers	Individual officers	Police Scotland as an organisation	Don't know
Individual	20	0	8	2
Organisation	11	1	1	0
All responses	31	1	9	2

Note: Total respondents = 43

5.2.8 1.2C: If an explicit statutory duty of candour is to be placed on the police (either as an organisation or on individual officers), should this relate specifically to incidents involving on duty officers only?

Respondent type	Yes	No	Don't know
Individual	8	18	4
Organisation	3	10	0
All responses	11	28	4

Note: Total respondents = 43

5.2.9 1.2D: If an explicit statutory duty of candour is to be placed on individual police officers, should that duty only apply when an officer's status as a witness has been confirmed?

Respondent type	Yes	No	Don't know
Individual	12	15	3
Organisation	9	4	0
All responses	21	19	3

Note: Total respondents = 43

5.2.10 1.2E: Should police officers have a statutory duty of co-operation to assist during investigations, inquiries and formal proceedings?

Respondent type	Yes	No	Don't know
Individual	21	4	4
Organisation	12	1	0
All responses	33	5	4

Note: Total respondents = 42

5.2.11 1.2F: If a statutory duty of co-operation should apply to police officers as per question 1.2E, should this also apply to former officers?

Respondent type	Yes	No	Don't know
Individual	20	6	3
Organisation	8	5	0
All responses	28	11	3

Note: Total respondents = 42

5.2.12 1.2G: If a statutory duty of co-operation should apply to police officers as per question 1.2E, should this also apply to police staff (or former police staff)?

Respondent type	Yes, for both police staff and former police staff	Yes, for current police staff but not former police staff	No	Don't know
Individual	21	3	3	3
Organisation	7	6	0	0
All responses	28	9	3	3

Note: Total respondents = 43

5.2.13 1.2H: Do you think any of the following should be required if officers have a statutory duty to co-operate during investigations, inquiries and formal proceedings?

Respondent type	Yes, officers should be required to participate openly	Yes, officers should be required to participate promptly	Other	No	Don't know
Individual	21	21	4	3	2
Organisation	9	9	2	1	0
All responses	30	30	6	4	2

Note: Respondents could select more than one option, therefore the total number of respondents that answered this question cannot be determined.

5.2.14 1.2I: If a statutory duty of co-operation is to be placed on the police, should that duty relate specifically to incidents involving on duty officers only?

Respondent type	Yes	No	Don't know
Individual	9	16	4
Organisation	3	10	0
All responses	12	26	4

Note: Total respondents = 42

5.2.15 1.2J: Should the Police Investigations and Review Commissioner (PIRC) have a statutory power, where it is necessary and proportionate, to compel police officers to attend within a reasonable timescale for interview?

Respondent type	Yes	No	Don't know
Individual	25	2	3
Organisation	11	2	0
All responses	36	4	3

Note: Total respondents = 43

5.2.16 1.2K: If the Police Investigations and Review Commissioner (PIRC) is to be provided with a power to compel police officers to attend within a reasonable timescale for interview, how should a reasonable timescale for interview be determined?

Respondent type	PIRC to determine timescales	Timescales to be set in legislation	Other	Don't know
Individual	1	25	2	2
Organisation	3	7	3	0
All responses	4	32	5	2

Note: Total respondents = 43

5.2.17 1.2L: In light of questions 1.2A-1,2K above, should the Scottish Government consider possible amendments to the constable's declaration to reflect an obligation to assist with investigations, where appropriate?

Respondent type	Yes	No	Don't know
Individual	22	3	5
Organisation	9	4	0
All responses	31	7	5

Note: Total respondents = 43

5.2.18 1.2M: In light of questions 1.2A-1.2K above, should the Scottish Government consider possible amendments to the Standards of Professional Behaviour to reflect an obligation to assist with investigations, where appropriate?

Respondent type	Yes	No	Don't know
Individual	23	4	3
Organisation	9	3	1
All responses	32	7	4

Note: Total respondents = 43

5.2.19 1.3A: Should people working in Police Scotland be able to raise their concerns about wrongdoing within that organisation ("whistleblowing concerns") with an independent third-party police oversight organisation?

Respondent type	Yes, with another body (please specify)	Yes, with the PIRC	No	Don't know
Individual	17	11	0	2
Organisation	2	9	1	1
All responses	19	20	1	3

Note: Total respondents = 43

5.2.20 1.3B: Should people working in the Scottish Police Authority be able to raise their concerns about wrong doing within that organisation ("whistleblowing concerns") with an independent third-party police oversight organisation?

Respondent type	Yes, with another body (please specify)	Yes, with the PIRC	No	Don't know
Individual	18	10	1	1
Organisation	2	9	1	1
All responses	20	19	2	2

Note: Total respondents = 43

5.2.21 1.3C: Should concerns raised about wrongdoing within policing in Scotland ("whistleblowing concerns") be audited by an independent third-party police oversight organisation?

Respondent type	Yes, with another body (please specify)	Yes, with the PIRC	No	Don't know
Individual	16	9	1	2
Organisation	2	8	1	2
All responses	18	17	2	4

Note: Total respondents = 41

5.2.22 1.4A: Should legal aid be available to all families of people who die in police custody or following police contact, regardless of their ability to pay?

Respondent type	Yes	No	Don't know
Individual	23	7	0
Organisation	8	1	1
All responses	31	8	1

Note: Total respondents = 40

5.2.23 1.4C: Should there be an opportunity in Article 2 cases, where appropriate, for family and common interest groups to receive civil legal aid funding on a group basis?

Respondent type	Yes	No	Don't know
Individual	22	6	2
Organisation	7	0	2
All responses	29	6	4

Note: Total respondents = 39

5.2.24 1.5A: Should the existing law be clarified regarding PIRC's powers to investigate an incident involving the death of a serving police officer?

Respondent type	Yes	No	Don't know
Individual	17	4	6
Organisation	5	3	0
All responses	22	7	6

Note: Total respondents = 35

5.2.25 1.6A: Should the term "Person serving with the police" be more clearly defined?

Respondent type	Yes	No	Don't know
Individual	25	4	1
Organisation	12	1	0
All responses	37	5	1

Note: Total respondents = 43

5.2.26 1.6B: Should the definition include clarity on PIRC powers to investigate the following people?

Respondent type	Officers who have since retired from the service	Officers who have since resigned from the service	Officers who were off duty at the time of the incident ("act or omission")	Other
Individual	24	22	21	6
Organisation	11	12	10	3
All responses	35	34	31	9

Note: Respondents could select more than one option, therefore the total number of respondents that answered this question cannot be determined.

5.2.27 1.6D: Should the term "Member of the public" be more clearly defined, to make clear who may make a relevant complaint?

Respondent type	Yes	No	Don't know
Individual	19	7	3
Organisation	12	1	0
All responses	31	8	3

Note: Total respondents = 42

5.2.28 1.6E: If "Member of the public" is to be defined, should any definition make clear that it includes a serving police officer who is off duty at the time of the incident?

Respondent type	Yes	No	Don't know
Individual	18	9	3
Organisation	11	1	0
All responses	29	10	3

Note: Total respondents = 42

5.2.29 2.1A: Should the PIRC should be re-designated as a Commission?

Respondent type	Yes	No	Don't know
Individual	21	4	3
Organisation	8	1	2
All responses	29	5	5

Note: Total respondents = 39

5.2.30 2.1B: If PIRC is re-designated as a Commission, do you agree that two deputy Commissioners should be appointed?

Respondent type	Yes	No	Don't know
Individual	20	6	2
Organisation	7	2	2
All responses	27	8	4

Note: Total respondents = 39

5.2.31 2.1G: Do you agree that a statutory Board should be created?

Respondent type	Yes	No	Don't know
Individual	20	3	4
Organisation	5	4	2
All responses	25	7	6

Note: Total respondents = 38

5.2.32 2.1I: How do you think that the Police Investigations and Review Commissioner (PIRC) should be appointed?

Respondent type	Appointment made on nomination of the Scottish Parliament	Remain a Scottish Ministerial appointment	Don't know
Individual	14	6	8
Organisation	7	3	1
All responses	21	9	9

Note: Total respondents = 39

5.2.33 2.1K: Do you agree that PIRC should be appointed by Her Majesty the Queen?

Respondent type	Yes	No	Don't know
Individual	9	13	6
Organisation	6	2	1
All responses	15	15	7

Note: Total respondents = 38

5.2.34 2.1M: Where do you think that accountability arrangements for PIRC should sit?

Respondent type	Remain with the Scottish Ministers	Transfer to the Scottish Parliament	Don't know
Individual	1	23	4
Organisation	3	7	1
All responses	4	30	5

Note: Total respondents = 39

5.2.35 2.2A: Should PIRC be able to access the Police Scotland complaints and conduct database remotely?

Respondent type	Yes	No	Don't know
Individual	22	3	1
Organisation	10	1	0
All responses	32	4	1

Note: Total respondents = 37

5.2.36 2.2E: Do you agree that the PIRC requires this additional power to call in an investigation of a complaint?

Respondent type	Yes	No	Don't know
Individual	21	3	2
Organisation	9	1	2
All responses	30	4	4

Note: Total respondents = 38

5.2.37 2.2F: Should the PIRC be able to investigate a complaint against Police Scotland in certain circumstances?

Respondent type	Yes, if the complainer provides compelling evidence of a failure on the part of Police Scotland	Yes, if the Commissioner assesses that it would be in the public interest to carry out an independent re-investigation	Yes, if there is sufficient evidence that Police Scotland has not dealt with a complaint properly	Yes, Other	No	Don't know
Individual	23	20	22	8	0	0
Organisation	8	10	9	0	1	1
All responses	31	30	31	8	1	1

Note: Respondents could select more than one option, therefore the total number of respondents that answered this question cannot be determined.

5.2.38 2.2H: Noting HMICS' role, should the PIRC be able to investigate a current practice of Police Scotland if the Commissioner believes it would be in the public interest?

Respondent type	Yes	No	Don't know
Individual	20	4	2
Organisation	7	4	1
All responses	27	8	3

Note: Total respondents = 38

5.2.39 2.2I: Noting HMICS' role, should the PIRC be able to investigate a current policy of Police Scotland if the Commissioner believes it would be in the public interest?

Respondent type	Yes	No	Don't know
Individual	20	4	2
Organisation	7	4	1
All responses	27	8	3

Note: Total respondents = 38

5.2.40 2.2J: If the PIRC is to be given a new power enabling them to investigate current practices or policies of Police Scotland, should the power to investigate be restricted or limited in any way?

Respondent type	Yes	No	Don't know
Individual	6	16	4
Organisation	7	3	2
All responses	13	19	6

Note: Total respondents = 38

5.2.41 2.2L: Should recommendations from the PIRC be put on a statutory footing similar to current reconsideration directions following a review and/or audit of police complaints handling?

Respondent type	Yes, following a review	Yes, following an audit	Yes, following both a review and an audit	No	Don't know
Individual	6	0	13	3	4
Organisation	1	0	6	4	1
All responses	7	0	19	7	5

Note: Total respondents = 38

5.2.42 2.2M: Following a complaint handing review or audit of complaint handling reviews, should Police Scotland or other policing bodies be required to act on those recommendations if it is in the public interest?

Respondent type	Yes, except for another reason (please specify)	Yes, unless there is an overriding operational or practical reason not to	Yes, with no restrictions	No	Don't know
Individual	1	8	15	2	0
Organisation	1	7	2	1	1
All responses	2	15	17	3	1

Note: Total respondents = 38

5.2.43 2.2N: Should Police Scotland have to respond to recommendations made by the PIRC following a review of police complaints handling?

Respondent type	Yes	No	Don't know
Individual	23	2	1
Organisation	11	1	0
All responses	34	3	1

Note: Total respondents = 38

5.2.44 2.2O: Should Police Scotland have to respond to recommendations made by the PIRC following an audit of police complaints handling?

Respondent type	Yes	No	Don't know
Individual	22	3	1
Organisation	11	1	0
All responses	33	4	1

Note: Total respondents = 38

5.2.45 3.1A: Should police officer gross misconduct hearings be held in public?

Respondent type	Yes	No	Don't know
Individual	18	10	1
Organisation	6	5	1
All responses	24	15	2

Note: Total respondents = 41

5.2.46 3.1C: If gross misconduct hearings are to be held in public, should these hearings be for officers of all ranks who are being investigated for gross misconduct, or senior officers only?

Respondent type	All ranks of officers	Senior officers only	Don't know
Individual	22	5	2
Organisation	7	0	2
All responses	29	5	4

Note: Total respondents = 38

5.2.47 3.1D: If gross misconduct hearings are to be heard in public, should the Chair of a hearing have discretion to restrict attendance as they see appropriate?

Respondent type	Yes	No	Don't know
Individual	15	12	2
Organisation	8	1	2
All responses	23	13	4

Note: Total respondents = 40

5.2.48 3.1F: To what extent do you agree or disagree that in addition to the existing protections for witnesses, the Chair of the gross misconduct hearing should consider whether the evidence of any vulnerable witnesses should be heard in private to ensure the protection of such vulnerable witnesses (this may include the officer who is the subject of the proceedings)?

Respondent type	Strongly agree	Agree	Neither agree nor disagree	Disagree	Strongly disagree
Individual	15	3	3	2	4
Organisation	9	2	0	0	1
All responses	24	5	3	2	5

Note: Total respondents = 39

5.2.49 3.1G: In addition to the existing protections for witnesses, to what extent do you agree or disagree that the Chair of the gross misconduct hearing should be obliged to consider any other reasonable adjustments that they believe to be necessary to ensure the protection of such vulnerable witnesses (this may include the officer who is the subject of the proceedings)?

Respondent type	Strongly agree	Agree	Neither agree nor disagree	Disagree	Strongly disagree
Individual	16	6	2	1	1
Organisation	10	1	0	0	1
All responses	26	7	2	1	2

Note: Total respondents = 38

5.2.50 3.1I: To what extent do you agree or disagree the outcome of gross misconduct proceedings should be made public?

Respondent type	Strongly agree	Agree	Neither agree nor disagree	Disagree	Strongly disagree
Individual	20	3	0	1	2
Organisation	8	2	0	2	1
All responses	28	5	0	3	3

Note: Total respondents = 39

5.2.51 3.1K: To what extent do you agree or disagree that an illustrative, publicly available list of matters likely to be considered by a gross misconduct hearing would be useful?

Respondent type	Strongly agree	Agree	Neither agree nor disagree	Disagree	Strongly disagree
Individual	17	5	3	0	1
Organisation	5	2	1	1	1
All responses	22	7	4	1	2

Note: Total respondents = 36

5.2.52 3.1M: If a publicly available list of matters to be considered by a gross misconduct hearing were to be available, should a finding of gross misconduct always result in dismissal, unless there are exceptional circumstances to justify an alternative sanction?

Respondent type	Yes	No	Don't know
Individual	18	7	1
Organisation	6	4	2
All responses	24	11	3

Note: Total respondents = 38

5.2.53 3.1N: If the outcome of gross misconduct proceedings is to be made public, should the Chair's report, subject to any necessary redactions, be published by the Scottish Police Authority on its website?

Respondent type	Yes	No	Don't know
Individual	19	4	3
Organisation	7	3	2
All responses	26	7	5

Note: Total respondents = 38

5.2.54 3.1P: If the outcome of gross misconduct hearings is to be published by the Scottish Police Authority on its website, how long should the report be available online?

Respondent type	Made available online for at least 28 days	Made available online for a different period	Don't know
Individual	11	12	2
Organisation	5	1	4
All responses	16	13	6

Note: Total respondents = 35

5.2.55 3.1Q: Dame Elish highlighted a number of areas where amendments to the conduct regulations should be considered or regulations could be clarified. Do you agree that these further recommendations should be considered as policy is further developed?

Respondent type	Yes	No	Don't know
Individual	21	1	3
Organisation	9	1	2
All responses	30	2	5

Note: Total respondents = 37

5.2.56 3.1S: From which category of person should the appointment of the Chair of any misconduct hearing which is considering allegations against senior officers, be made?

Respondent type	A senior expert in policing (other than HM Chief Inspector)	An HR professional	An independent lay person	An independent legally qualified person	A member of the SPA	HM Chief Inspector of Constabulary	Other
Individual	1	1	2	17	0	0	4
Organisation	1	0	0	10	0	0	0
All responses	2	1	2	27	0	0	4

Note: Total respondents = 36

5.2.57 3.1T: In addition to an appointed Chair (as per question 3.1S above), should any misconduct hearing which is considering allegations against senior officers include members made up of any of the following categories of person?

Respondent type	An independent legally qualified person	A member of the SPA	HM Chief Inspector of Constabulary	A senior expert in policing (other than HM Chief Inspector)	An independent lay person	An HR professional	Other
Individual	13	5	5	11	13	7	2
Organisation	4	2	2	10	5	5	0
All responses	17	7	7	21	18	12	2

Note: Respondents could select more than one option, therefore the total number of respondents that answered this question cannot be determined.

5.2.58 3.1V: From which category of person should the appointment of the Chair of any gross misconduct hearing which is considering allegations against an officer of the rank of Chief Superintendent, be made?

Respondent type	A senior expert in policing	An HR professional	An independent lay person	An independent legally qualified person	A member of the SPA	A senior officer from another police service	A retired senior officer	Other
Individual	1	0	3	18	0	0	0	2
Organisation	0	1	0	5	0	0	0	2
All responses	1	1	3	23	0	0	0	4

Note: Total respondents = 32

5.2.59 3.1W: In addition to an appointed Chair, should any gross misconduct hearing which is considering allegations against an officer of the rank of Chief Superintendent include members made up of any of the following categories of person?

Respondent type	An independent legally qualified person	A member of the SPA	A senior expert in policing	A senior officer from another police service	A retired senior officer	An independent lay person	An HR professional	Other
Individual	14	4	6	4	3	11	5	2
Organisation	4	2	6	3	1	6	4	3
All responses	18	6	12	7	4	17	9	5

Note: Respondents could select more than one option, therefore the total number of respondents that answered this question cannot be determined.

5.2.60 3.1Y: From which category of person should the appointment of the Chair of any gross misconduct hearing which is considering allegations against non-senior officers below the rank of Chief Superintendent be made?

Respondent type	A serving officer of the rank of superintendent or above who is at least two ranks higher than the subject officer	An independent lay person	An independent legally qualified person	A member of the SPA	An HR professional	Other
Individual	1	2	18	0	0	2
Organisation	2	0	6	0	0	0
All responses	3	2	24	0	0	2

Note: Total respondents = 31

5.2.61 3.1Z: In addition to an appointed Chair (as per question 3.1Y above), should a gross misconduct hearing which is considering allegations against non-senior officers below the rank of Chief Superintendent include members made up of any of the following categories of person?

Respondent type	An independent legally qualified person	A member of the SPA	A serving officer of the rank of superintendent or above who is at least two ranks higher than the subject officer	An independent lay person	An HR professional	Other
Individual	14	1	5	16	5	2
Organisation	2	3	5	6	4	1
All responses	16	4	10	22	9	3

Note: Respondents could select more than one option therefore the total number of respondents that answered this question cannot be determined.

5.2.62 3.1BB: Do you agree that the Lord President should appoint the Chair of a misconduct hearing which is considering allegations against officers?

Respondent type	Yes, for senior officers	Yes, for Chief Superintendents	Yes, for non-senior officers below the rank of Chief Superintendent	No, not for any police officer	Don't know
Individual	13	12	11	7	4
Organisation	8	6	4	3	0
All responses	21	18	15	10	4

Note: Respondents could select more than one option, therefore the total number of respondents that answered this question cannot be determined.

5.2.63 3.1CC: Do you agree that the Lord President should appoint the panel of a misconduct hearing which is considering allegations against officers?

Respondent type	Yes, for senior officers	Yes, for Chief Superintendents	Yes, for non-senior officers below the rank of Chief Superintendent	No, not for any police officer	Don't know
Individual	11	11	10	8	5
Organisation	6	4	4	5	1
All responses	17	15	14	13	6

Note: Respondents could select more than one option, therefore the total number of respondents that answered this question cannot be determined.

5.2.64 3.2A: Should it be possible to continue, or begin, gross misconduct proceedings against former officers?

Respondent type	Yes, but only for rank of Chief Superintendent and above	Yes, for all ranks of police officers	Yes, but only for senior officers	No, not for any police officer	Don't know
Individual	1	18	0	4	1
Organisation	0	8	0	3	1
All responses	1	26	0	7	2

Note: Total respondents = 36

5.2.65 3.2C: If it is possible to continue, or begin, gross misconduct proceedings after an officer has left the service, who should be responsible for making that decision (to continue or begin proceedings)?

Respondent type	Chief Constable	The Police Investigations and Review Commissioner (PIRC)	The Scottish Police Authority (SPA)	Other	Don't know
Individual	2	11	6	6	3
Organisation	4	3	3	1	3
All responses	6	14	9	7	6

Note: Respondents could select more than one option, therefore the total number of respondents that answered this question cannot be determined.

5.2.66 3.2E: In deciding whether to continue with, or begin, gross misconduct proceedings after an officer has left the service, should the relevant authority be required to take into account the wishes of a complainer?

Respondent type	Yes	No	Don't know
Individual	13	8	3
Organisation	7	3	1
All responses	20	11	4

Note: Total respondents = 35

5.2.67 3.2F: Do you think any of the following changes to gross misconduct hearings would have altered how you answered the above questions (3.2A-E)?

Respondent type	Yes, if gross misconduct hearings were to be held in public	Yes, if gross misconduct hearings were to be chaired by a legally qualified chair	No	Don't know
Individual	4	5	14	3
Organisation	1	1	9	2
All responses	5	6	23	5

Note: Respondents could select more than one option, therefore the total number of respondents that answered this question cannot be determined.

5.2.68 3.2H: Should it be possible for gross misconduct proceedings to be taken forward where allegations came to the attention of the relevant authority (as per question 3.2.C above) more than 12 months after the person ceased to be an officer, and the following conditions are met:
a) the case is serious and exceptional,
b) the case is likely to damage public confidence in policing, and
c) the PIRC has determined disciplinary proceedings reasonable and proportionate?

Respondent type	Yes	No	Don't know
Individual	17	6	1
Organisation	8	3	1
All responses	25	9	2

Note: Total respondents = 36

5.2.69 3.2J: If gross misconduct proceedings are to begin more than 12 months after a person ceased to be an officer, should these proceedings be for officers of all ranks?

Respondent type	Yes, but only for senior officers	Yes, but only for frank of Chief Superintendent and above	Yes, for all ranks of police officers	No, not for any police officer	Don't know
Individual	1	0	18	4	1
Organisation	0	0	8	3	1
All responses	1	0	26	7	2

Note: Total respondents = 36

5.2.70 3.2K: Should the Scottish Government work with the UK Government to adopt barred and advisory lists and other potential models?

Respondent type	Yes, by using the Barred and Advisory Lists model	Yes, by adopting other measures	No	Don't know
Individual	21	3	0	5
Organisation	7	1	1	3
All responses	28	4	1	8

Note: Respondents could select more than one option, therefore the total number of respondents that answered this question cannot be determined.

5.2.71 3.3A: Do you agree that, given the transfer of the Police Appeals Tribunal to the Scottish Tribunals, senior officer conduct regulations should be revised to ensure that for all gross misconduct hearings where there has been a finding of gross misconduct, there should be only one route of appeal i.e. to the Police Appeals Tribunal?

Respondent type	Yes, for senior officer regulations	No, the regulations should not be revised
Individual	18	5
Organisation	7	1
All responses	25	6

Note: Total respondents = 31

5.2.72 3.3B: Do you agree that the same route of appeal to the Police Appeals Tribunal should be included in regulations for findings of misconduct against senior officers or should the appeal process be managed by the independent legally chaired panel?

Respondent type	Yes, to the Police Appeals Tribunal	No, by the independent legally-chaired panel	Don't know
Individual	8	10	5
Organisation	7	1	0
All responses	15	11	5

Note: Total respondents = 31

5.2.73 3.4A: Should accelerated gross misconduct hearings be able to take place when the evidence is incontrovertible and can prove gross misconduct without any additional evidence being needed?

Respondent type	Yes	No	Don't know
Individual	17	6	1
Organisation	5	2	2
All responses	22	8	3

Note: Total respondents = 34

5.2.74 3.4B: Should accelerated gross misconduct hearings be able to take place to deal with circumstances where the subject officer admits to their behaviour being gross misconduct?

Respondent type	Yes	No	Don't know
Individual	20	2	2
Organisation	7	1	2
All responses	27	3	4

Note: Total respondents = 34

5.2.75 3.4C: If accelerated gross misconduct hearings are to be a possibility, in cases involving non-senior officers, who should decide what evidence is considered to be incontrovertible?

Respondent type	Assistant Chief Constable (ACC) responsible for conduct matters	Chief Constable	Deputy Chief Constable (DCC) responsible for conduct matters	Police Scotland's Professional Standards Department	Other	Don't know
Individual	1	1	2	3	12	3
Organisation	0	0	3	2	1	3
All responses	1	1	5	5	13	6

Note: Total respondents = 31

5.2.76 3.4D: If accelerated gross misconduct hearings are to be a possibility, in cases involving senior officers, who should decide what evidence is considered to be incontrovertible?

Respondent type	Chief Constable	The Police Investigations and Review Commissioner	The Scottish Police Authority	Other	Don't know
Individual	0	6	1	11	3
Organisation	3	1	1	2	3
All responses	3	7	2	13	6

Note: Total respondents = 31

5.2.77 3.4F: If accelerated gross misconduct hearings are to be a possibility, in cases involving non-senior officers, who should decide if expedited proceedings would be appropriate in each circumstance?

Respondent type	ACC responsible for conduct matters	DCC responsible for conduct matters	Police Scotland's Professional Standards Department	Chief Constable	Other	Don't know
Individual	1	2	3	0	11	4
Organisation	0	4	2	0	1	2
All responses	1	6	5	0	12	6

Note: Total respondents = 30

5.2.78 3.4G: If accelerated gross misconduct hearings are to be a possibility, in cases involving senior officers, who should decide if expedited proceedings would be appropriate in each circumstance?

Respondent type	Chief Constable	The PIRC	The SPA	Other	Don't know
Individual	1	11	2	4	2
Organisation	2	2	1	2	2
All responses	3	13	3	6	4

Note: Total respondents = 29

5.2.79 3.4H: Should an investigation into allegations take place in circumstances where evidence is deemed to be incontrovertible, but the subject officer does not admit to their behaviour being gross misconduct?

Respondent type	Yes	No	Don't know
Individual	19	3	1
Organisation	7	1	2
All responses	26	4	3

Note: Total respondents = 33

5.2.80 3.4I: Should the Scottish Ministers consider (either in legislation or guidance) applying indicative timescales to the investigation of misconduct allegations?

Respondent type	Yes	No	Don't know
Individual	19	4	1
Organisation	8	1	1
All responses	27	5	2

Note: Total respondents = 34

5.2.81 3.4J: Where an officer is convicted of a criminal offence which would constitute gross misconduct, should the Chairing Panel or Chairing Constable be able to move to dismiss that officer immediately, without separate misconduct proceedings?

Respondent type	Yes	No	Don't know
Individual	14	8	2
Organisation	5	4	1
All responses	19	12	3

Note: Total respondents = 34

5.2.82 3.5A: To what extent do you agree or disagree that the preliminary assessment of misconduct allegations made against senior police officers should be carried out by the PIRC?

Respondent type	Strongly agree	Agree	Neither agree nor disagree	Disagree	Strongly disagree
Individual	14	3	2	0	4
Organisation	5	2	0	0	2
All responses	19	5	2	0	6

Note: Total respondents = 32

5.2.83 3.5B: If the PIRC is to carry out the preliminary assessment of misconduct allegations made against senior police officers, should the preliminary assessment of an allegation or complaint be decided on by the Commissioner or their Deputy?

Respondent type	Yes	No	Don't know
Individual	15	4	3
Organisation	6	1	1
All responses	21	5	4

Note: Total respondents = 30

5.2.84 3.5C: Should the PIRC take on responsibility for key aspects of misconduct and gross misconduct proceedings for senior officers?

Respondent type	Yes, for receipt of complaints and allegations, where appropriate, referral to an independent legally chaired panel	Yes, for preliminary assessment	Yes, for referral to COPFS of criminal allegations	Yes, for referral to an independent legally chaired panel where appropriate if there is a disciplinary hearing subsequent to referral to COPFS	No	Don't know
Individual	18	8	10	12	5	2
Organisation	6	7	6	7	1	0
All responses	24	15	16	19	6	2

Note: Respondents could select more than one option, therefore the total number of respondents that answered this question cannot be determined.

5.2.85 3.5D: When the relevant body is deciding whether an investigation into an allegation against a senior officer or non-senior officer should be carried out, should that body take into consideration whether an allegation is made anonymously?

Respondent type	Yes, for both senior officers and non-senior officers	Yes, for non-senior officers	Yes, for senior officers	No, not for any police officers	Don't know
Individual	0	5	2	14	2
Organisation	2	2	2	3	1
All responses	2	7	4	17	3

Note: Total respondents = 33

5.2.86 3.5E: When the relevant body is deciding whether an investigation into an allegation against a senior officer or non-senior officer should be carried out, should that body take into consideration whether an allegation is sufficiently specific in time and location?

Respondent type	Yes, for both senior officers and non-senior officers	Yes, for non-senior officers	Yes, for senior officers	No, not for any police officers	Don't know
Individual	0	6	3	12	2
Organisation	3	2	3	1	1
All responses	3	8	6	13	3

Note: Total respondents = 33

5.2.87 3.5F: When the relevant body is deciding whether an investigation into an allegation against a senior officer or non-senior officer should be undertaken, should that body take into consideration whether an allegation is malicious?

Respondent type	Yes, for both senior officers and non-senior officers	Yes, for non-senior officers	Yes, for senior officers	No, not for any police officers	Don't know
Individual	0	8	2	10	2
Organisation	3	2	3	2	1
All responses	3	10	5	12	3

Note: Total respondents = 33

5.2.88 3.5G: When the relevant body is deciding whether an investigation into an allegation against a senior officer or non-senior officer should be undertaken, should that body take into consideration whether an allegation is vexatious?

Respondent type	Yes, for non-senior officers	Yes, for senior officers	No, not for any police officers	Don't know
Individual	7	2	11	2
Organisation	2	4	2	1
All responses	9	6	13	3

Note: Total respondents = 31

5.2.89 3.5I: Do you agree that the PIRC should be able to present a case at a senior officer gross misconduct hearing?

Respondent type	Yes	No	Don't know
Individual	19	2	1
Organisation	7	2	1
All responses	26	4	2

Note: Total respondents = 32

5.2.90 3.5J: Do you agree that the independent legally chaired panel should have the capacity to hold a preliminary hearing to identify any evidence that is not in dispute and can be agreed, as well as any other matters that can be resolved ahead of the formal hearing?

Respondent type	Yes	No	Don't know
Individual	21	1	2
Organisation	9	0	1
All responses	30	1	3

Note: Total respondents = 34

5.2.91 3.5L: Should the PIRC have the ability to recommend the suspension of a senior officer?

Respondent type	Yes	No	Don't know
Individual	21	3	0
Organisation	8	2	0
All responses	29	5	0

Note: Total respondents = 34

5.2.92 3.5M: If the PIRC is to be able to recommend the suspension of a senior officer, to what extent do you agree or disagree that suspension should only be recommended in circumstances when not suspending the officer may prejudice an effective misconduct investigation?

Respondent type	Strongly agree	Agree	Neither agree nor disagree	Disagree	Strongly disagree
Individual	9	3	4	4	3
Organisation	4	1	1	2	2
All responses	13	4	5	6	5

Note: Total respondents = 33

5.2.93 3.5O: If the PIRC is to be able to recommend the suspension of a senior officer, should the PIRC be required to provide supporting reasons when they make such a recommendation to the SPA?

Respondent type	Yes	No	Don't know
Individual	19	3	0
Organisation	10	0	0
All responses	29	3	0

Note: Total respondents = 32

5.2.94 3.6A: Given the work that is already underway to align processes and policies on vexatious complainers across policing bodies, should the Scottish Government also consider amending legislation to deal with vexatious complainers?

Respondent type	Yes	No	Don't know
Individual	18	4	2
Organisation	6	2	2
All responses	24	6	4

Note: Total respondents = 34

5.2.95 3.7A: Should the Scottish Ministers be able to issue statutory guidance in respect of conduct?

Respondent type	Yes	No	Don't know
Individual	17	2	2
Organisation	10	1	0
All responses	27	3	2

Note: Total respondents = 32

5.2.96 3.7B: If the Scottish Ministers are to be able to issue statutory guidance, should they be required to consult on any such guidance?

Respondent type	Yes	No	Don't know
Individual	18	0	3
Organisation	10	0	0
All responses	28	0	3

Note: Total respondents = 31

5.2.97 3.7C: If the Scottish Ministers are to be able to issue statutory guidance, then should a duty to have regard to any such guidance be placed on policing bodies?

Respondent type	Yes	No	Don't know
Individual	16	0	3
Organisation	11	0	0
All responses	27	0	3

Note: Total respondents = 30

5.2.98 3.7D: If the Scottish Ministers are to be able to issue statutory guidance, then should any such guidance be used to bring forward guidance in respect of a new Reflective Practice Review Process?

Respondent type	Yes	No	Don't know
Individual	17	0	2
Organisation	10	1	0
All responses	27	1	2

Note: Total respondents = 30

5.2.99 3.7E: If statutory guidance on conduct is to be prepared, should the Scottish Ministers consider using this to make clear where matters relate to conduct and where they do not ( i.e. where they may relate to performance or grievance matters instead)?

Respondent type	Yes	No	Don't know
Individual	15	0	4
Organisation	10	1	0
All responses	25	1	4

Note: Total respondents = 30

5.2.100 3.7G: To what extent do you agree or disagree that regulations governing police conduct in Scotland should be reviewed in order that consideration can be given to bringing them into line with Acas' latest code of practice on disciplinary and grievance procedures?

Respondent type	Strongly agree	Agree	Neither agree nor disagree	Disagree	Strongly disagree
Individual	14	3	4	1	1
Organisation	3	2	3	1	0
All responses	17	5	7	2	1

Note: Total respondents = 32

5.2.101 3.7H: Should it be possible for joint misconduct proceedings to be held to deal with any number or rank of officers?

Respondent type	Yes	No	Don't know
Individual	16	4	2
Organisation	5	2	3
All responses	21	6	5

Note: Total respondents = 32

5.2.102 3.7K: If joint misconduct proceedings are to be possible when appropriate, who should make the decision as to whether joint proceedings are appropriate in each circumstance?

Respondent type	Assistant Chief Constable responsible for conduct matters	Chief Constable	Deputy Chief Constable responsible for conduct matters	Police Scotland's Professional Standards Division	Other	Don't know
Individual	1	1	2	4	6	6
Organisation	1	0	2	1	2	1
All responses	2	1	4	5	8	7

Note: Total respondents = 27

5.2.103 3.7L: Do you think any of the following changes to gross misconduct hearings would have altered how you answered the above questions (3.7H-3.7K)?

Respondent type	Yes, if gross misconduct hearings for senior officers were to be chaired by a legally qualified chair	Yes, if gross misconduct hearings were to be held in public for senior officers only	No	Don't know
Individual	1	2	13	4
Organisation	0	0	5	1
All responses	1	2	18	5

Note: Total respondents = 26

5.2.104 3.7N: Given that the speed of an investigation and its perceived fairness and rigour can be considered a trade off against one another, to what extent do you agree or disagree that any allegation of misconduct should be dealt with more speedily during an officer's probation period?

Respondent type	Strongly agree	Agree	Neither agree nor disagree	Disagree	Strongly disagree
Individual	14	0	4	3	3
Organisation	5	2	1	0	1
All responses	19	2	5	3	4

Note: Total respondents = 33

5.2.105 3.7O: If allegations of misconduct are to be dealt with during an officer's probation period, how should these be dealt with?

Respondent type	Through the conduct regulations which all other officers are subject to when allegations of misconduct are made	Through the regulations which govern probation	Other	Don't know
Individual	12	7	3	1
Organisation	3	5	0	1
All responses	15	12	3	2

Note: Total respondents = 32

5.2.106 3.7P: Would your answer to either N or O be different if timescales relating to the investigation stages of misconduct allegations were set out in legislation to say how quickly an investigation should be conducted (as discussed on page: Accelerated misconduct hearings in Question 3.4I)?

Respondent type	Yes	No	Don't know
Individual	4	12	7
Organisation	2	5	2
All responses	6	17	9

Note: Total respondents = 32

5.2.107 3.7R: Should there be a condition which must be met before an officer is suspended?

Respondent type	Yes, that temporary redeployment to alternative duties has been considered	Yes, that a temporary alternative location to operate from has been considered	Yes, Other	No	Don't know
Individual	12	8	3	6	3
Organisation	8	6	2	0	2
All responses	20	14	5	6	5

Note: Respondents could select more than one option, therefore the total number of respondents that answered this question cannot be determined.

5.2.108 3.7S: If a condition must be met before it is recommended that an officer is suspended, which officers should this relate to?

Respondent type	All ranks of officers	Senior officers only	Don't know
Individual	22	0	1
Organisation	8	0	2
All responses	30	0	3

Note: Total respondents = 33

5.2.109 3.7T: Should all suspended officers have the terms of their suspensions reviewed regularly?

Respondent type	Yes, suspension should be reviewed every 4 weeks	Yes, suspension should be reviewed on another time frame (please specify)	No	Don't know
Individual	16	3	2	3
Organisation	5	1	0	3
All responses	21	4	2	6

Note: Total respondents = 33

5.2.110 3.8A: Do you agree that conduct regulations for special constables should be revised to bring them in line with those for regular police officers?

Respondent type	Yes	No	Don't know
Individual	23	2	1
Organisation	8	1	1
All responses	31	3	2

Note: Total respondents = 36

5.2.111 4.1A: Should liability for unlawful conduct, provided to all other constables when carrying out their functions, be extended to cover the rank of Chief Constable?

Respondent type	Yes	No	Don't know
Individual	22	3	0
Organisation	8	0	1
All responses	30	3	1

Note: Total respondents = 34