"It seems to me that the nature of the exercise which is required in vetting is different from the exercise in disciplinary proceedings. In disciplinary proceedings, in common with many situations in which a decision-maker has to decide whether an event occurred in the past, the balance of probabilities is a sensible way to decide that question of fact. Either an event happened or it did not."
"The judge continued that the test for vetting "is to be used in the context of an assessment of risk". Lord Justice Singh later said: "The vetting decision requires an evaluation of risk as to what may happen in the future.""
"However, John Beggs KC, for Scotland Yard, said the issue over whether a review of vetting can consider concerns that have not resulted in formal misconduct was still "live"."
A High Court finding that vetting withdrawal could not lawfully be used to dismiss officers was challenged at the Court of Appeal. Sergeant Lino Di Maria had his vetting removed after sexual assault allegations he denies and was found to have no case to answer; he argued removal without proven accusations breached his right to a fair trial. The Metropolitan Police and the College of Policing appealed, noting new regulations introduced in April that give forces power to dismiss for lack of vetting clearance. The Court of Appeal granted the Met's appeal, holding vetting assesses future risk and may consider unproven concerns.
Read at www.standard.co.uk
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]