Ombudsman is accused of '˜witch hunt' against officers

Speaking yesterday at the federation’s annual conference, chairman Mark Lindsay called for an appeals process to allow challenges to investigation reports published by the ombudsman.

Addressing an audience at La Mon House Hotel which included Ombudsman Dr Michael Maguire, Mr Lindsay said the federation has “well-documented” concerns with the “absence of credible accountability” within the police ombudsman’s office. However he said the federation is not opposed to the function of the office, in relation to the independent investigation of “genuine complaints” from members of the public.

He commented: “There is very little officer confidence in relation to the operation of the ombudsman’s office.”

Mr Lindsay added: “It is often viewed as nothing more than a pawn in a political game, one where it revels in publicising minor indiscretions and attempting to balance this with evidence of officers doing their job competently in an extremely challenging environment.”

He continued: “The recent revelations about a firearm in a drawer and the theft of the most sensitive of information, demand that the government must redefine the role of the office to ensure that the men and women I represent are not the victims of a ‘witch-hunt’, and are not hung out to dry without the benefit of an appeal process.”

Mr Lindsay said reform was “essential” and there was “an obvious need for an independent avenue of appeal, whereby officers will have meaningful redress against malicious complaints”.

Addressing Dr Maguire, he commented: “This isn’t about you, but rather the legislative architecture of the system you preside over. If your office conducts itself with the high standards you demand of police officers, then surely you have nothing to fear from such accountability.”

Mr Lindsay also criticised the PPS: “The role of the PPS in recommending officers for prosecution as a result of (ombudsman) reports is also questionable.

“Several cases against officers were dismissed immediately by judges when the evidence had been presented.

“Examples of failure to produce relevant additional CCTV evidence which would explain an officer’s lawful actions, or to take fully into account the operational context, only add fuel to the fire that officers are being reported for prosecution for matters which fail to take into account their unique role in society.”

Responding to Mr Lindsay’s comments, a spokesperson for the police ombudsman said it was “disappointing” that the Police Federation chairman had chosen to air views which it said were “unfounded”.

The spokesperson said: “Dr Maguire (Police Ombudsman for Northern Ireland) is more than willing to speak with the Police Federation regarding what Mr Lindsay has described as inept investigations and a witch hunt, both of which the office would refute.”

They added: “Mr Lindsay’s comments are odds with the feedback from police officers who have been investigated by the office (and obtained through independent survey): 89% said they were treated with respect and more than 75% felt that the complaint had been handled in an independent manner.”

The spokesperson said an independent survey of public attitudes in NI recorded that almost 80% of people have confidence that the ombudsman’s office “deals with complaints in an impartial way and a similar number see us as independent of the police”.

They said that contrary to Mr Lindsay’s assertions, disciplinary findings can be appealed by the officer concerned.

“It is frustrating that the chairman makes these comments without having spoken to the Police Ombudsman,” said the spokesperson.