Five year legislative review

What is the current position?

Legislation currently requires the Chief Constable and the Policing Board to supply information and documents for the purposes of, or in connection with, the exercise of any of the Police Ombudsman’s functions.

This is a general and broad obligation on Police and the Board to provide full disclosure to the Ombudsman and thereafter it is for the Ombudsman to determine the relevance of the disclosure to investigations.

This obligation does not extend to any other person, body or agency who may have evidence, information or documents within their possession and control which, in the Ombudsman’s opinion, are relevant to an investigation.

In addition, the Police Ombudsman currently has no power to compel any witness or suspect (whether a serving or retired police officer) to give a statement of evidence in a reasonable time. 

What we propose

We believe that legislation should be amended to include an obligation upon any person to produce any documents in their custody or control relevant to an investigation and that any person should be required to provide for inspection, examination or testing any other thing in their custody or control.

We also believe the legislation should be amended to provide power to compel officers (serving or retired), as witnesses and suspects to attend for interview and produce documents, and to do so within a reasonable time.

We also believe that the High Court should be given powers to deal with obstruction by any person of a Police Ombudsman investigation, where such obstruction is in connection with an investigation.

Why is it important?

The Venice Principles (Principle 16) recognise that an ombudsman institution must have ‘unfettered access’ to any evidence or documentation that is relevant to an investigation.

Third parties other than the PSNI and the Policing Board may have evidence, information or documents within their possession and control which are relevant to a Police Ombudsman investigation.

The Coroner has powers to require evidence to be given, documents be produced or anything further required for the purposes of an inquest. The Police Ombudsman’s investigation process, like a Coroner’s inquest, is inquisitorial in nature and not adversarial. Therefore, the need for wide information gathering powers is enhanced.

The Coroner also has the power to compel evidence or documents and may fine an individual for failing to comply with a notice to do so.

The Northern Ireland Public Services Ombudsman (NIPSO) also has power to compel any public body in her jurisdiction or any staff or member or officer of that body, and also to compel any other third party who may have relevant information or documents, to give evidence and produce documents.

The IOPC in England and Wales has power to compel the provision of information by way of an Information Notice being served on any person.

Under the Policing, Security and Community Safety Act 2024, Fiosrú, Office of the Police Ombudsman in Ireland, can ‘require any person who, in his or her opinion, possesses information or has a document or thing in his or her power or control that is relevant to, and required for the purposes of, the investigation, to provide that information, document or thing to the designated officer’.