Categories
Law Police

Police Professional Standards Department (PSD)

Police Professional Standards Department (PSD)

A Police Professional Standards Department (PSD) operates under a framework of legislation and guidance to ensure police officers and staff uphold high standards of conduct, integrity, and professionalism. Professional Standards Departments are responsible for:

  • Investigating Complaints: Handling public complaints and internal misconduct allegations, ensuring fair and impartial investigations.
  • Vetting: Conducting enhanced vetting checks to ensure officers and staff meet high standards of integrity.
  • Anti-Corruption: Investigating allegations of corruption, dishonesty, or unethical behaviour through dedicated Anti-Corruption Units (ACUs).
  • Maintaining Public Trust: Upholding the Code of Ethics and ensuring police actions align with the principle of policing by consent, which relies on public confidence in police integrity.

The College of Policing publish Guidance for ethical and professional behaviour in policing.

The Home Office published Statutory guidance Policing professional standards, performance and integrity

  • The Standards of Professional Behaviour apply to all police officers, special constables, and staff, covering areas like integrity, respect, and appropriate use of authority.
  • PSDs operate differently across forces (e.g., Sussex Police, Herts Police, Metropolitan Police), but all adhere to the same legislative framework.

A police department that deals with complaints against officers and staff. It receives, records, investigates and resolves public complaints and also records and investigates misconduct allegations.

His Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary and Fire & Rescue Services Professional Standards department (PSD) Glossary

By law, a police force must be able to investigate a complaint and have the opportunity to explain, apologise or put things right themselves. 

Sussex Police refused to record an allegation of stalking as a crime….hardly policing without fear of favour. Check out the article National Stalking Awareness Week – Sussex Police. This has now been reported to the Sussex Police Professional Standards Department to investigate.

Key Legislation and Regulations

  1. Police (Conduct) Regulations 2020
    • These regulations, which revoked and replaced the Police (Conduct) Regulations 2012, govern internal conduct matters for police officers and special constables. They outline the Standards of Professional Behaviour, which include expectations such as honesty, integrity, respect, and fairness. Breaches are categorised as misconduct (serious enough to warrant disciplinary action) or gross misconduct (serious enough to justify dismissal).
    • The regulations work alongside the Police (Complaints and Misconduct) Regulations 2020, which address public complaints under Schedule 3 of the Police Reform Act 2002.
    • Key provisions include requirements for officers to cooperate during investigations, treat information appropriately, and report colleagues’ conduct that falls below professional standards.
  2. Police Reform Act 2002
    • This act provides the framework for handling public complaints against police officers and staff. It established the Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC), which oversees serious complaints and misconduct investigations, ensuring independent scrutiny. PSDs liaise with the IOPC for certain cases, such as those involving death, serious injury, or significant public interest.
  3. Police Act 1996
    • Section 39A allows the College of Policing to issue a Code of Ethics as a code of practice, setting out principles and standards of professional behaviour for police officers and staff. The Code of Ethics, developed in 2014, incorporates the The Seven Principles of Public Life also known as the Nolan Principles (e.g., integrity, accountability) plus fairness and respect, guiding PSD operations.
    • Section 87 provides for guidance on disciplinary proceedings, ensuring consistency in how PSDs handle misconduct.
  4. Policing and Crime Act 2017
    • This act introduced reforms to the police complaints and disciplinary system, enhancing transparency and accountability. It amended the handling of complaints and misconduct, strengthening the role of PSDs in investigating allegations and ensuring public confidence. Changes include centralized complaints handling and improved vetting processes.
  5. Anti-Social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014
    • This act amended the Police Act 1996 to reinforce the Code of Ethics as a statutory code of practice, ensuring that all police forces adhere to consistent ethical standards. It supports PSDs in maintaining professional behaviour across forces.
  6. Police (Complaints and Misconduct) Regulations 2020
    • These regulations complement the Police (Conduct) Regulations 2020 by addressing public complaints and other disciplinary matters. They outline procedures for PSDs to record, investigate, and resolve complaints, including mandatory referrals to the IOPC for serious cases.
Lawful Use of Handcuffs by the Police

Check out our articles on Policing by Consent, Police Impartiality, Police Surveillance, Are the Police for Hire ?, Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC), Police Public Confidence and Engagement, Crime Reporting, What is a Police and Crime Commissioner ?, Sussex Police, Policing, Police News, Two Tiered Policing, Thought Police, Wasting Police Time, Police Community Support Officers (PCSO), Met Police, Chief Constable Jo Shiner, R v Sussex Justices and the highly questionable Sussex Family Justice Board.

The Ministry of Injustice is not the Ministry of Justice nor is it affiliated in any way with the justice system, legal profession, police or any other law enforcement agencies.

Latest Articles ↓

Most Popular ↓

You should always seek formal legal advice from a qualified and reputable lawyer (solicitor or barrister).

There are a number of links to Free and Paid For Legal Resources and Legal Organisations on the Free Legal Advice , Legal Aid and Pro Bono pages.

[post_title] was last updated on the 2nd June 2026

By Dom Watts

Dom Watts founded the Ministry of Injustice in July 2021. Dom is an IT Professional with 30+ years experience in Tier 1 Banking, Government, Defence, Healthcare and Global Blue Chips. Dom has no legal training and is not a lawyer but has previously consulted for a Magic Circle Law Firm. You can find Dom on X or Google.

Dom Watts publishes the Ministry of Injustice as a citizen journalist. The journalism exemption is detailed in the Data protection and journalism code of practice published by the ICO and Section 124 of the Data Protection Act 2018.

Section 2 of the Defamation Act 2013 sets out the defence of truth. Section 3 of the Defamation Act 2013 sets out the defence of honest opinion. Section 4 of the Defamation Act 2013 sets out the defence of public interest. Section 8 of the Defamation Act 2013 sets out the single publication rule.

Section 4a of The Limitation Act 1980 defines the time limit for actions for defamation or malicious falsehood as one year from the date on which the cause of action accrued.

Article 10 of the Human Rights Act 1998 gives the right to freedom of expression. "This right shall include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers."

"Free speech encompasses the right to offend, and indeed to abuse another." - Para 43 Scottow v CPS [2020] EWHC 3421 (Admin)

"Free speech is a fundamental common law right" - Para 21 R v Shayler [2002] UKHL 11 [2003] 1 AC 247 per Lord Bingham and Para 42 Phillips -v- Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs [2024] EWHC 32 (Admin)

Dom is a member of The Free Speech Union

“A key issue here is the need to distinguish between conduct which, however objectionable, does not justify invoking the criminal law and conduct which crosses the line and results in criminal liability" - Para 31 R v O’Neill [2016] EWCA Crim 92 [2016]

“Harassment is generally understood to involve improper oppressive and unreasonable conduct that is targeted at an individual and calculated to produce alarm and distress” - Para 38 R v O’Neill [2016] EWCA Crim 92 [2016]

"The behaviour said to amount to harassment must reach a level of seriousness passing beyond irritations, annoyances....The gravity of the misconduct must be of an order which would sustain criminal liability" - Paras [40-44] Hayden v Dickenson [2020] EWHC 3291 (QB)

"If you tell the truth, you don't have to remember anything"

In 2002 Dom Watts was an unlikely consumer champion. The dad of three from Croydon took on the power and might of Kodak – and won...Dom on BBC Working Lunch

Rule of Law - Open Justice - Policing By Consent