Reducing Bureaucracy in Policing - Home Office

Over compensating for mistakes, particularly those with tragic outcomes can be counter-productive
and create additional bureaucracy. The reaction to recent tragic high profile anti social behaviour
cases has gone from one end of the pendulum to the other, from treating anti social behaviour as
low priority to treating every case as high priority, with requirement to comply with procedures and
complete detailed documentation irrespective of risk. This is not sustainable and fails to encourage
a measured approach to learning and improvement
Officers also express concern that the use of professional judgment in decision making is not
supported by the law. Such a perception is unhelpful as case law tends to provide an alternative
perspective.
I am grateful to colleagues at the NPIA who have identified positive court decisions – indicating;
• Police work would be seriously impeded if the police were required to treat every report
from a member of the public that he or she is being threatened with violence as giving
rise to a duty of care to take reasonable steps to prevent the alleged threat from being
executed;
• It is unjust to expect police officers confronted with rapidly unfolding, extreme situations
to achieve the same standards as they might otherwise manage in a planned operation;
• The court will take into account the level of professional standards that existed at the
time of the incident rather than at the time the case reaches trial;
• The claimant needs to show that the police officer did not act consistently with
contemporary professional practice;
Although each case is determined on its own facts, case law demonstrates an understanding of the
demands of policing and the need for a proportionate, measured approach.
9