Category: Police

Police articles and analysis.

Categories
Police

Police Federation of England and Wales (PFEW)

Police Federation of England and Wales (PFEW)

The Police Federation of England and Wales (PFEW) is the statutory staff association for police officers in the federated ranks across the 43 territorial forces in England and Wales.

It represents about 145,000 constables, sergeants, inspectors, chief inspectors, and special constables. Unlike a traditional trade union, the PFEW operates under specific legal constraints and focuses on welfare, efficiency, pay, conditions and professional support for its members.

Police Federation History and Origins

The Police Federation was established by the Police Act 1919 in the aftermath of the 1918–1919 police strikes, particularly in London, where large numbers of officers refused duty to demand better pay, pensions, and recognition of their union.

The government, under Prime Minister David Lloyd George, conceded on pay but outlawed police trade unions and the right to strike due to public safety concerns. The Federation was created as a formal alternative mechanism for representation and negotiation.

Its structure and operations remained largely unchanged for nearly a century until reforms following an independent review in 2014. Rules and regulations were updated in 2017 to improve governance, financial management, conduct standards, elections, and representation of under-represented groups. The core purpose was also revised in 2014 to balance accountability to members with acting in the public interest.

Police officers remain prohibited from joining ordinary trade unions or taking industrial action under the Police Act 1996.

Police Federation Role, Aims, and Objectives

The Police Federation’s core purpose is to represent and promote the interests and welfare of its members while supporting professional standards and the efficiency of the police service. It has a statutory duty to relay members’ views to government, opinion formers, and stakeholders.

Key aims include:

  • Representing members on discipline, diversity, health and safety, welfare, pensions, claims, and other issues.
  • Influencing decision-makers at local and national levels on pay, conditions, operational matters, and legislation.
  • Negotiating collectively on pay, allowances, hours, leave, and pensions (primarily through the Police Remuneration Review Body).
  • Providing training on equality, promotion, discipline, and health and safety.
  • Offering advice, legal representation, and support when officers face allegations, accidents on duty, or workplace issues.

It is non-political, controlled by serving officers, and has no power to call strikes. Membership subscriptions fund its activities, and full benefits (including legal support) require payment of subscriptions.

Police Federation Structure and Membership

The Federation operates at local and national levels:

  • Local level: Each of the 43 forces has a Branch Council of elected workplace representatives (who serve alongside their policing duties). A Branch Board (including Chair, Secretary, and Treasurer) handles force-level negotiations with chief constables and Police and Crime Commissioners.
  • National level: Branch Chairs and Secretaries, plus representatives from protected characteristic groups, form the National Council. From this, a National Board is elected as a key decision-making body. There are also eight regional groupings.

The PFEW Headquarters are at Federation House in Leatherhead, Surrey, which also provides training and accommodation facilities.

Membership is open to eligible officers and is optional for full benefits (though all eligible ranks are officially members).

Subscriptions are £26.31 per month with effect from the 1st January 2026. A 50% first-year discount for probationary constables continued to apply to existing student officers but was withdrawn for all new members joining from that date.

Tax relief is available on subscriptions. Special constables have been eligible since 2022.

Police Federation Services, Campaigns, and Recent Focus

The Federation provides practical support through local reps trained in Police Regulations, legal assistance, welfare services, and member benefits such as discounted accommodation. It campaigns on pay, recruitment and retention, officer wellbeing, and operational issues.

Recent activity highlighted on polfed.org includes concerns over officer numbers (nearly 25,000 resignations since 2021), pay awards falling short of independent recommendations, high levels of officers considering leaving the service, and the launch of an independent Integrity Line (operated by Safecall) for confidential reporting of concerns about the Federation itself. It has also sought involvement in police accountability reviews and supported training programmes for representatives.

In 2025–2026 the organisation has been undergoing a transformation programme addressing governance, finances, culture, and member services, including the planned appointment of independent non-executive directors.

Police Federation Fraud and Bribery Investigation

The Police Federation has been the subject of a high-profile investigation by the City of London Police’s domestic corruption unit into suspected fraud and bribery. The probe, described by police as complex and high-profile, has been ongoing for more than a year.

In early March 2026, three men who currently or previously held senior roles in the Federation’s governance and operational structure were arrested on suspicion of fraud by abuse of position.

They were a 46-year-old man from Surrey (understood to be chief executive Mukund Krishna), a 51-year-old man from Wales, and a 55-year-old man from Bristol.

Search warrants were executed at Federation House in Leatherhead and residential addresses in Wales, Somerset, London, and Surrey. All three were interviewed and released on conditional bail. Days later, the Federation confirmed Krishna’s suspension “due to an ongoing police investigation.” The organisation stated it was cooperating fully with authorities.

On the 18th August 2026, four more people including two men (one in his 40s, one in his 50s) and two women (both in their 50s), were arrested at an address in Leatherhead, Surrey. This included two serving police officers.

All four were questioned on suspicion of fraud by abuse of position of trust. One of the women and the man in his 50s were also held on suspicion of bribery and fraud by failing to disclose information. They were taken to a police station for questioning. This brought the total number of arrests in the investigation to seven.

Detective Superintendent Jim Halkett of the City of London Police said the investigation “continues to make significant progress, with officers working through a number of lines of inquiry to establish the full facts and circumstances surrounding this case.” No specific financial amounts have been publicly detailed in relation to the current investigation, and no charges have been reported at the time of writing. The case remains active.

Conclusion

The Police Federation of England and Wales continues to serve as the primary voice for the vast majority of frontline officers in England and Wales, balancing statutory representation with practical support on the issues that affect officers’ working lives.

While it navigates ongoing challenges around pay, retention, and internal governance which includes the active fraud investigation, it remains a key institution in British policing, rooted in more than a century of history and focused on both member welfare and the efficiency of the service.

What is Policing by Consent ?
Lawful Use of Handcuffs by the Police

Check out our articles on Policing by Consent, Police Professional Standards, Policing Performance System, Police Misconduct Hearings, Police Impartiality, Police Leadership Commission, 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.

“Publicity is the very soul of justice. . . . It keeps the judge himself, while trying, under trial….Where there is no publicity there is no justice”

Jeremy Bentham – Mr Justice Cobb: ‘Justice must be seen to be done’

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.

Categories
Criminal Justice Legal Professionals Police

What is the Criminal Justice System (CJS) Common Platform ?

Criminal-Justice-System-Common-Platform (CJSCP)

The Criminal Justice System Common Platform (also known as HMCTS Common Platform or CJSCP) is the national digital case management system for criminal cases in the Crown Courts and magistrates’ courts of England and Wales.

Designed and developed by HM Courts & Tribunals Service (HMCTS) as part of its Reform Programme (which began in earnest around 2016, building on earlier modernisation efforts dating back to 2011), it replaces multiple outdated “heritage” or legacy systems such as Libra, Xhibit, and the Digital Case System (DCS).

The platform creates a single, shared source of case information that professional users across the criminal justice system can access securely and in near real time.

Purpose and Key Benefits

The HMCTS CJS Common Platform allows Police, the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS), judiciary, court staff, defence solicitors and barristers, Legal Aid Agency, prisons, probation, and other agencies to view, update and share case materials digitally.

The CJS Common Platform is the official digital record of case progress, results and structured hearing outcomes in magistrates and crown courts

Core functions include:

  • Case creation, progression, and resulting (recording outcomes, orders, warrants, and notices).
  • Self-service of Initial Details of the Prosecution Case (IDPC) and digital forms such as the Preparation for Effective Trial (PET) or Better Case Management forms.
  • Association of defence firms/chambers with specific defendants or cases (marking them “on record”).
  • Hearing check-in for advocates.
  • Real-time notifications and updates.
  • Support for Single Justice Procedure (SJP) cases, postal requisitions, and summons via Automated Track Case Management (ATCM).

By February 2025, more than 2.3 million criminal cases had been managed on the platform. It is live in all criminal courts in England and Wales (full national rollout completed around August 2023), handling thousands of hearings daily and supporting tens of thousands of concurrent users. Benefits include reduced paper handling, fewer errors, faster information sharing, greater resilience (remote access), and better data for performance analysis.

The system uses Unique Reference Numbers (URNs) which are typically 11-character case identifiers that link records across partners.

CJS Common Platform Technology Stack

Common Platform is a cloud-native, microservices-based system hosted primarily on Microsoft Azure. Key technical elements include:

  • Architecture: Microservices framework supporting CQRS (Command Query Responsibility Segregation) and event sourcing (public GitHub repositories under CJSCommonPlatform/microservice-framework show a Java-based core). It uses a service-oriented approach with Docker containers.
  • Backend: Heavily Java-based services; some Node.js components for front-end gateways. PostgreSQL databases (with migrations to managed instances noted in backlogs), Redis for sessions/caching.
  • Frontend / User Interface: Angular-based single-page applications in related HMCTS services, with GOV.UK Design System influences; accessible via modern browsers (Chrome, Edge, Firefox, Safari — Internet Explorer is unsupported).
  • Identity and Access Management (Crime IdAM): Central to secure login. Uses ForgeRock now Ping Identity (AM, IDM, IG, DS/LDAP components) integrated with Microsoft Entra ID (formerly Azure Active Directory). Supports Multi-Factor Authentication (MFA) via Microsoft Authenticator app (Time-based One-Time Password / TOTP), Single Sign-On (SSO), and Role-Based Access Control (RBAC). Environments include production (PRD), pre-production (PRP), system integration testing (SIT), non-functional testing (NFT), and an internal BAE (PR) environment (an HMCTS technical label for a specific identity instance, unrelated to the defence company BAE Systems).
  • Infrastructure: Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS) for container orchestration, Azure Key Vault for secrets, Application Insights / Dynatrace for monitoring, Jenkins for CI/CD, Terraform for infrastructure-as-code, Docker, Nginx, Tomcat, and Ubuntu (with migrations from RHEL). Platform-as-a-Service databases and auto-scaling have reduced costs and improved resilience.

Emails for account activation come from Azure-hosted servers ([email protected]). The domain name is cjscp.org.uk (Criminal Justice System Common Platform).

If you have arrived at the Ministry of Injustice from https://cjscp.uk (MOI domain) you may well have been looking for https://cjscp.org.uk which is the official website for The Criminal Justice System (CJS) Common Platform

CJS Common Platform Contract Values and Suppliers

Development and ongoing support for the CJS Common Platform (and its related Crime IdAM identity layer) have involved multiple suppliers working under Crown Commercial Service (CCS) frameworks.

Key confirmed examples include:

  • Digital Outcomes (and related Digital Marketplace frameworks) — used for the larger HMCTS Crime Programme Design, Development and Testing Managed Service (indicative budget up to £12.75 million), with Scrumconnect later becoming a primary supplier for ongoing development work.
  • RM6100 Technology Services 3 was used for the HMCTS Crime IdAM Product Enhancement Team Managed Service awarded to CGI IT UK Limited (value ~£5.19 million).

CJSCP development contracts

This was the large development contract for the Common Platform itself (indicative budget up to £12.75 million).

Scrumconnect was later reported as a key (and in some periods sole) supplier for ongoing design, development, testing, automation features, and maintenance work. Subsequent related contracts and extensions have supported continued enhancement of the platform.

Other supporting contracts cover broader MoJ identity work (e.g., Entra ID configuration) and platform operations.

Primary Crime IdAM document

How to Access the Common Platform

Access is restricted to authorised professional users and organisations. Members of the public cannot log in directly.

Defendants in certain cases (e.g. Single Justice Procedure) may submit online pleas or receive information through other channels, but they do not access the Common Platform itself.

Organisation Registration

  • Defence firms/chambers: An organisation administrator completes the official registration spreadsheet (Excel or CSV, available on GOV.UK) with organisation and user details (including mobile numbers — shared/landline/CJSM emails are not allowed). Accept terms and conditions and email the form to [email protected].
  • Prosecuting organisations: Complete a questionnaire covering address, volumes, offence codes, etc.
  • HMCTS validates and onboards the organisation.

Individual Account Activation

  • Each user receives an email from [email protected] (check spam; links expire after 28 days).
  • Follow the link, accept terms, verify mobile number with a one-time code, create a strong password (8+ characters, mixed case, numbers, specials and change every 90 days), and set up Microsoft Authenticator by scanning a QR code.
  • Activation must be completed before first court use.

Login and Use

  • Main sign-in: https://prosecuting.cjscp.org.uk (or role-specific portals).
  • Subdomains such as https://login.bae.cjscp.org.uk point to specific internal environments (e.g., the BAE identity instance).
  • Use a supported browser on desktop/laptop/tablet. You need your registered phone for MFA but cannot access the platform solely via mobile.
  • After login: Associate with cases (using defendant details or URN), self-serve IDPC, manage materials, check in to hearings, etc.
  • Help: Courts and Tribunals Service Centre (CTSC) on 0330 808 4407 or [email protected]; organisation administrators handle day-to-day user management.

Full official guides are published on GOV.UK under “How to use HMCTS Common Platform” and related administrator documents.

HMCTS Common Platform for defence administrators is a guide for legal defence administrators on creating user accounts, assigning roles, and other system tasks.

Summary

The CJS Common Platform represents one of the largest digital transformations in the UK justice system.

Built on modern Azure cloud microservices technology with robust identity controls (ForgeRock + Microsoft Entra ID), it has processed millions of cases.

Ongoing contracts with the CGI-managed IdAM service and Scrumconnect’s development work, ensure continued enhancement.

Access to the Common Platform is tightly controlled through organisational registration and multi-factor authentication to protect sensitive criminal justice data.

Check out our related articles on CJSM, Rule of Law, Open Justice, Is the Law Black and White ?, What Does Lady Justice Symbolise ?, Can a Judge Direct a Jury to Find a Defendant Not Guilty ?,Law Society, Law Commission, Solicitors, Solicitors Regulation Authority, Barristers, Bar Council of England and Wales, Bar Standards Board, Contra Mundum, R v Sussex Justices, Police Impartiality 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.

“Publicity is the very soul of justice. . . . It keeps the judge himself, while trying, under trial….Where there is no publicity there is no justice”

Jeremy Bentham – Mr Justice Cobb: ‘Justice must be seen to be done’

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.

Categories
Police

The Policing Performance System

The Policing Performance System

In April 2026, His Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary and Fire & Rescue Services (HMICFRS) has introduced the Policing Performance System (PPS) to strengthen how police performance is monitored and improved across England and Wales.

The Policing Performance System is a joint approach between the policing sector and government to assess, support and improve police performance across England and Wales. It provides transparent, consistent assessment and enables earlier support where improvement is needed, helping forces achieve better outcomes for communities.

Latest police performance levels – HMICFRS

Background

The PPS forms part of the government’s January 2026 white paper From local to national: a new model for policing. It replaces the previous HMICFRS “Scan” and “Engage” monitoring arrangements and works alongside the new Police Performance Framework.

The goal is to identify issues early, offer targeted support and ensure sustainable progress rather than relying solely on reactive inspections.

How the Policing Performance System Works ?

Every one of the 43 police forces in England and Wales is assigned to one of four performance levels. Assignment reflects a force’s current performance, the extent of support required, and its expected engagement with improvement processes.

Forces are continually assessed, with all encouraged to engage proactively with support tools. The system draws on PEEL inspections, force management statements, and other data sources to promote consistency and early intervention.

The Four Performance Levels

Police forces are assigned to one of four performance levels. Each level has associated degrees of support and intervention. The level assigned to a police force reflects:

  • its current performance;
  • the extent of support required; and
  • the expected level of interaction with the support and intervention process.

Level One is the default position for most forces. It applies where there is an overall positive trajectory, even with minor, mitigated concerns. No formal intervention is required, although chief constables and police and crime commissioners may request local support.

Level Two provides enhanced support to prevent deterioration. This level suits forces with enduring low-level, non-systemic issues, receding problems needing oversight, or multiple minor concerns. Forces can self-access or request additional help.

Level Three involves targeted support and intervention. It applies to forces facing a single critical and lasting issue, widespread or systemic concerns, or insufficient progress on existing problems. Chief constables must develop improvement plans and receive bespoke assistance, often from the College of Policing. Lincolnshire Police was placed in Level Three in the first assessments due to issues with call attendance times and child abuse investigations.

Level Four (Special Measures) is the highest level of concern. It is reserved for very serious failings where there is insufficient confidence in current improvement efforts. Forces face statutory requirements to follow HMICFRS recommendations and may be subject to Home Secretary intervention powers.

Oversight and Monitoring

All levels are overseen by the Policing Performance Monitoring Group (PPMG). Chaired by His Majesty’s Chief Inspector of Constabulary, the group includes senior representatives from the Home Office, HMICFRS, the College of Policing, the Association of Police and Crime Commissioners, the National Police Chiefs’ Council and the Independent Office for Police Conduct.

The PPMG meets regularly to review performance, hold forces to account, identify good practice, and ensure consistent decision-making. Forces in higher levels are typically required to conduct root cause analysis and share improvement plans.

Latest Developments

On the 16th July 2026, HMICFRS published the first police performance levels under the new system.

While the majority of forces were placed in Level One, a small number received Level Two. Lincolnshire Police was placed in Level Three of the Policing Performance System.

This initial rollout highlights the system’s emphasis on proportionate and supportive intervention.

What is Policing by Consent ?
Lawful Use of Handcuffs by the Police

Check out our articles on Policing by Consent, Police Professional Standards, Police Misconduct Hearings, Police Impartiality, Police Leadership Commission, 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.

“Publicity is the very soul of justice. . . . It keeps the judge himself, while trying, under trial….Where there is no publicity there is no justice”

Jeremy Bentham – Mr Justice Cobb: ‘Justice must be seen to be done’

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.

Categories
Police

Police Leadership Commission Report

Police Leadership Commission Report

An independent review by the Police Leadership Commission has concluded that police leadership across England and Wales falls short of the consistently high standards the public and officers deserve, calling for a fundamental modernisation of how leaders are recruited, trained and promoted.

Titled Professionalism and performance – police leadership for the future, the report was published on the 6th July 2026 by the College of Policing.

The report was commissioned in October 2025 with Home Office support, and represents the most comprehensive examination of police leadership in England and Wales in a generation.

Key Findings

The report paints a concerning picture of inconsistent leadership standards. His Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary, Fire and Rescue Services (HMICFRS) graded no force as “outstanding” for leadership, with nearly a third requiring improvement and two deemed inadequate.

Police leadership is not consistently of a high enough standard and requires a fundamental overhaul, a landmark independent review has warned.

The report by the Police Leadership Commission, published on Monday, found the system for identifying and developing leaders was too weak, with chief constable roles in England and Wales often attracting a single suitable candidate.

Police leadership needs fundamental overhaul, review finds – BBC

Frontline pressures are acute as almost a third of officers have fewer than five years’ experience, morale is low, and many cite resource shortages, excessive bureaucracy and risk-averse cultures that leave staff unsupported. Eight former or serving chief constables are currently subject to disciplinary investigations or awaiting outcomes.

Public confidence has also declined, with only 49% rating their local police as good or excellent in 2025, compared with 62% a decade earlier.

Central funding for leadership development currently accounts for just 0.02% of the overall police budget which is significantly lower than in other public services such as the NHS or the military.

Core Recommendations

The commission sets out 27 recommendations designed to reset the culture, raise standards and prepare policing for future challenges. Key proposals include:

  • Establishing a National Academy of Police Leadership with a dedicated centre, digital platform and nationwide presence to deliver consistent, high-quality training.
  • Introducing a new senior constable rank to recognise and reward experienced frontline officers who mentor colleagues and uphold standards.
  • Creating a police leadership fast stream open to both internal talent and external candidates, with the aim of developing up to 400 future leaders a year towards superintendent level.
  • Overhauling promotion processes to sergeant and inspector ranks, replacing the outdated examination with nationally accredited training and fairer, more transparent selection.
  • Introducing mandatory annual performance reviews supported by digital professional passports, alongside routine secondments, targeted direct entry from other sectors, and equal development opportunities for police staff.

The complete list of recommendations presented in the police leadership commission report is published on the College of Policing Website.

The full report Professionalism and performance – police leadership for the future is also published on the College of Policing Website.

Reactions and Next Steps

Policing Minister Sarah Jones welcomed the findings, stating that the recommendations would inform the government’s broader police reform programme. She acknowledged that too many examples of leadership have failed to meet expected standards and emphasised the need for consistent, high-quality training and development for every officer.

Lord Blunkett highlighted the importance of an “ethical reset”, while Sir Andy Marsh, Chief Executive of the College of Policing, described the report as a once-in-a-generation opportunity to invest properly in the service’s people.

A Path Forward

The proposals align closely with the government’s white paper on police reform – From Local to National: A New Model for Policing and aim to create a more professional, ethical and inclusive leadership culture capable of tackling modern threats such as online crime and technological change.

While the report celebrates pockets of outstanding leadership, it makes clear that systemic weaknesses must be addressed if trust and effectiveness are to be rebuilt. Coordinated implementation by the Home Office, College of Policing and forces will be essential in the months ahead.

What is Policing by Consent ?
Lawful Use of Handcuffs by the Police

Check out our articles on Policing by Consent, Police Professional Standards, Police Misconduct Hearings, 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.

“Publicity is the very soul of justice. . . . It keeps the judge himself, while trying, under trial….Where there is no publicity there is no justice”

Jeremy Bentham – Mr Justice Cobb: ‘Justice must be seen to be done’

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.

Categories
Criminal Justice Legal Analysis Police

What is Two Tier Policing ?

Two Tier Policing

The BBC describes so-called “two-tier policing” as where right-wing protests are considered to be dealt with more harshly than left-wing ones by the police. This explanation is simply not true.

The most simplistic and accurate explanation of two tier policing is that there’s one rule for one person and another rule for another. The publicly shown bias and discrimination by the Police is manifesting itself irrespective of politics, sexuality, race or colour.

The police should and must operate independently under the law without fear or favour. The Rule of Law applies to everyone regardless of who they are. Policing in this country and around the world is by consent. There should no bias by the police or by anyone in the justice system.

Lawful Use of Handcuffs by the Police

The debate over two-tiered policing has significant implications for public trust in law enforcement. If the perception of biased policing persists, it can erode confidence in the police and exacerbate social divisions. On the other hand, dismissing legitimate concerns about unequal treatment can also harm community relations and hinder efforts to address systemic issues within law enforcement.

Two-tiered policing remains a contentious issue, with strong arguments on both sides. While some see it as a reflection of systemic biases within law enforcement, others view it as a necessary differentiation based on the nature of the protests or other lawlessness.

Regardless of where one stands on the issue, it is crucial to continue scrutinising police practices to ensure fairness and accountability in all aspects of law enforcement.

The State of Policing Report 2022 and the Loss of Public Trust by HMICFRS said amongst other things “The public’s trust and confidence are unacceptably low. The fundamental principle of policing by consent, upon which the service is built, is at risk.”

What is Policing by Consent ?

The discussion of #TwoTierPolicing #TwoTierJustice and #TwoTierKeir along with Free Speech is very much alive on X.

Sir Keir Starmer stated “there is no two-tier policing“ and said it is a “non-issue”.

Elon Musk calls out Sir Keir Starmer as #TwoTierKeir

Metropolitan Police Commissioner Sir Mark Rowley has called accusations of two-tier policing “complete nonsense”.

They are hardly going to agree that there is Two Tier Policing ?! Maybe the Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC) should investigate ? Is the accusation of Police bias worthy of Judicial Review ?

Do you have evidence of two tier policing by the Met Police, West Midlands Police or any other UK police forces ? Contact Us

Met Police Commissioner Sir Mark Rowley demonstrates violent thuggery and Two Tiered Policing without Fear or Favour.
Superintendent Emlyn Richards of West Midlands Police explains Two Tier Policing in simple language.
The Guardian have been telling people about two-tier policing based on race and sexuality for decades

Adam Brooks calls out MORE two-tier policing

Adam Brooks calls out more two-tier policing as roads were closed for Pakistan Independence Day, but England fans were ...
Adam Brooks calls out MORE two-tier policing
Adam Brooks calls out MORE two-tier policing
Adam Brooks calls out more two-tier policing as roads were closed for ...
'I Am A VICTIM Of Two-Tier Policing' | Leeds Resident In TEARS After Being Arrested Over Rioters
'I Am A VICTIM Of Two-Tier Policing' | Leeds Resident In TEARS After Being Arrested Over Rioters
Talk EXCLUSIVE: Leeds resident Nicola Wilcox claims she was a victim ...
‘Two-tier policing’: UK police under fire over man’s arrest
‘Two-tier policing’: UK police under fire over man’s arrest
GB News host Alex Armstrong weighs in on the most recent case of ...
Two tier policing in the uk
Two tier policing in the uk
The policy is clear: priority is given to anyone but the British. Have ...
Totally Unacceptable Police Behaviour
Totally Unacceptable Police Behaviour
Use code BlackBelt at the link below to get an exclusive 60% off an ...
"Completely And Utterly UNACCEPTABLE!" | Reform UK's Richard Tice Blasts Two-Tier Policing Of Riots
"Completely And Utterly UNACCEPTABLE!" | Reform UK's Richard Tice Blasts Two-Tier Policing Of Riots
Tom Tugendhat said he did not believe there was a two-tier approach to ...

Check out our related articles on Policing by Consent, Thought Police, Sussex Police, Met Police, Chief Constable Jo Shiner Sussex Police, , What is a Police and Crime Commissioner and a Police and Crime Panel ?, Rule of Law, Open Justice, Innocent until Proven Guilty, 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.

“Publicity is the very soul of justice. . . . It keeps the judge himself, while trying, under trial….Where there is no publicity there is no justice”

Jeremy Bentham – Mr Justice Cobb: ‘Justice must be seen to be done’

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.

Categories
Police

Lawful Use of Handcuffs by the Police

Lawful Use of Handcuffs by the Police

Handcuffs are a standard restraint tool used by police officers across the United Kingdom to help maintain control, prevent escape, protect the public, or reduce the immediate risk of harm.

Any intentional application of force to the person of another is an assault.
The use of handcuffs amounts to such an assault and is unlawful unless it can be justified.
Justification is achieved through establishing not only a legal right to use handcuffs, but also good objective grounds for doing so in order to show that what the officer did was a reasonable, necessary and proportionate use of force

College of Policing – Handcuffing Module Personal Safety

The use of handcuffs is not automatic and is strictly governed by the legal requirement that any force must be lawful, necessary, proportionate and subject to continuous review.

Legal Basis

There is no dedicated legislation that deals solely with handcuffs. Their use is authorised under general provisions governing the use of force.

Section 3 of the Criminal Law Act 1967 states that a person may use “such force as is reasonable in the circumstances” in the prevention of crime or in effecting or assisting in the lawful arrest of an offender or suspected offender.

Section 117 of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (PACE) permits a constable to use reasonable force when exercising powers conferred by the Act, including powers of arrest.

Applying handcuffs constitutes a trespass to the person (technically an assault or battery) unless it is justified by these provisions.

Officers must have an objective, reasonable belief that the individual presents a risk of escape, violence towards officers or others, self-harm, or damage to property. Routine handcuffing, for example during every stop-and-search or low-level arrest, is not permitted. The individual police officer remains personally accountable for the decision.

The Human Rights Act 1998 is engaged where prolonged or unjustified restraint occurs. Unnecessary handcuffing may breach Article 3 (prohibition of inhuman or degrading treatment) or Article 5 (right to liberty and security). Courts judge reasonableness on the basis of the information available to the officer at the time, not with the benefit of hindsight.

College of Policing and Force Guidance

The College of Policing’s Authorised Professional Practice (APP) on Personal Safety and Use of Force requires officers to assess each situation individually. Relevant risk factors include the person’s behaviour, demeanour, level of intoxication, known medical conditions and any available intelligence regarding previous violence.

The Metropolitan Police Service Handcuffing procedures – Policy and Handcuffing procedures – Policy FAQ, released under Freedom of Information, makes clear that “the justification to handcuff a person is a use of force and it is up to the officer to justify his/her reasons for handcuffing.” Key procedural requirements include:

  • Double-locking the cuffs to prevent overtightening;
  • Regular checks for circulation and signs of distress;
  • Removal as soon as the risk has sufficiently subsided;
  • Particular caution with vulnerable groups (children, elderly, pregnant individuals, or those with visible injuries or medical conditions).

Rigid “speedcuffs” are the standard issue in most UK forces. They are usually applied with hands behind the back for high-risk subjects.

Body-worn video is routinely used to capture both the decision and the application, supporting accountability. Similar risk-based principles apply in all UK police forces.

The Henry Nowak Case

The death of 18-year-old Henry Nowak in Southampton on the 3rd December 2025 highlighted the critical importance of accurate scene assessment when using handcuffs.

Henry Nowak, a first-year Polish-born finance student at the University of Southampton, was stabbed five times by 23-year-old Vickrum Digwa using a 21 cm (approximately 8-inch) Sikh kirpan ceremonial knife. One wound to the chest was fatal. Digwa chased the unarmed Nowak before the attack.

When Hampshire Police officers arrived in the Portswood area, Vickrum Digwa falsely claimed that Nowak had racially abused him and started a fight.

Officers, acting on this information, treated Nowak as the suspect, handcuffed him, and arrested him while he was bleeding. Body-worn camera footage later showed Nowak repeatedly telling officers he had been stabbed and that he could not breathe. He pleaded for help. The handcuffs were removed only after he collapsed. First aid was attempted, but he was pronounced dead at the scene.

Newly released footage shows the teenager saying four times, ‘I’ve been stabbed’, to which one policeman replies, ‘I don’t think you have mate’.

Officers pull Mr Nowak along the ground as he continues to beg for help, telling them he cannot breathe at least seven times before he is ordered to place his hands in the cuffs.

The injured student was then arrested as he lay dying on the ground, drowning in his own blood.

Moment Henry Died Alone – Daily Mail

Following his conviction for murder at Southampton Crown Court, Vickrum Singh Digwa was sentenced on the 1st June 2026 to life imprisonment with a minimum term of 21 years by His Honour Judge William Mousley KC, the Honorary Recorder of Southampton and Resident Judge.

Police officers honestly believed that there were reasonable grounds for suspecting Henry had committed an offence and arrested him with the consequence he was handcuffed for about a minute before his condition further deteriorated and the arresting officer began CPR.

Judge William Mousley KC sentencing remarks in the case of The King v Vickrum Singh Digwa
Statement from DCC Robert France after man convicted of murdering student Henry Nowak in Southampton

“I am really sorry that Henry was arrested and handcuffed just before he lost consciousness.”

Temporary Deputy Chief Constable Robert France of Hampshire and Isle of Wight Constabulary Apology

The Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC) is independently investigating the officers’ actions, including the decision to handcuff, the assessment of his injuries, and the first aid provided. Officers are currently treated as witnesses. Nowak’s family, including his father Mark, has called for a “full, fearless and transparent” investigation, stating that Henry “did not die with dignity.”

On the 15th June 2026, The Solicitor General Ellie Reeves KC referred the sentence of Vickrum Digwa, convicted of the murder of Henry Nowak, to the Court of Appeal under the Unduly Lenient Sentence scheme.

Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC)

Training and Accountability

Officers receive regular conflict management training that includes restraint techniques, de-escalation, and situational awareness. Handcuffing forms part of personal protective equipment (PPE) programmes. Misuse can lead to internal misconduct proceedings, IOPC investigation, civil claims for assault or false imprisonment, and, in the most serious cases, criminal liability.

What is Two Tier Policing ?

Conclusion

Handcuffs remain a lawful and often essential tool in modern policing when used correctly. UK law and policy rightly demand individual risk assessment rather than blanket application.

The tragic death of Henry Nowak illustrates the immense difficulty officers can face when dealing with fast-moving incidents involving conflicting accounts and life-threatening injuries. It also reinforces the need for continual training, effective scene management and public confidence in policing decisions made under pressure.

Check out our articles on Policing by Consent, Police Professional Standards, Police Misconduct Hearings, 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.

“Publicity is the very soul of justice. . . . It keeps the judge himself, while trying, under trial….Where there is no publicity there is no justice”

Jeremy Bentham – Mr Justice Cobb: ‘Justice must be seen to be done’

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.

Categories
Police

Police Barred and Advisory Lists

Police Barred and Advisory Lists

The police barred and advisory lists, which are managed by the College of Policing, were introduced under the Police Barred List and Police Advisory List Regulations 2017. They record officers, special constables, and police staff who have been dismissed for serious misconduct or performance failings.

These Regulations are made under Part 4A of the Police Act 1996 (the “1996 Act”), which was inserted by section 30 of, and Schedule 8 to, the Policing and Crime Act 2017. Part 4A of the 1996 Act requires the College of Policing to maintain two lists; the police barred list (see section 88B) and the police advisory list (see section 88J). These Regulations are made under various powers in Part 4A to make provision supplementing the regime established under that Part.

Explanatory Note – Police Barred List and Police Advisory List Regulations 2017

Working alongside the advisory list, it prevents unsuitable individuals from re-entering policing roles while enhancing transparency and public trust.

Purpose and Background

The barred and advisory lists were established as part of the government’s commitment to raising standards in policing. They increase accountability for those dismissed and make the discipline system more transparent by publishing details where appropriate.

Both lists are administered by the College of Policing, which receives reports from forces following dismissals under the Police (Conduct) Regulations 2020 and Police (Performance) Regulations 2020.

Individuals remain on the barred list indefinitely unless they successfully appeal their dismissal or have their case reviewed after the minimum waiting period. This framework deters poor behaviour and supports a culture of high professional standards.

What the Police Barred List Contains

The barred list includes all officers, special constables, and staff dismissed after formal investigations. For public entries – primarily conduct-related dismissals of warranted officers and special constables – the College publishes the individual’s name, former force, rank, number, date of dismissal, and reason for dismissal.

Police staff and PCSOs appear on an internal version but are not published publicly. The College decides on publication after considering national security, ongoing investigations, or potential harm to individuals. In the vast majority of cases, details are made public.

Public Access and Updates

The police public barred list is searchable and updated monthly, with new names added by the end of the month following dismissal. Entries remain visible for five years from the date of publication before automatic removal from the public version (though the internal record continues).

Dismissals for gross incompetence follow a three-year public visibility period in some contexts, aligned with review rules.

The Advisory List

The advisory list covers individuals who resigned, retired, or left during an investigation, or before allegations came to light. It also includes volunteers whose designated status was withdrawn for conduct or performance reasons. There is no public access to this list.

Forces must consult the advisory list during vetting. While it does not automatically bar employment, hiring organisations must carefully consider the information as part of the recruitment and vetting process.

How the Lists Are Used

All Home Office police forces in England and Wales, Offices of Police and Crime Commissioners, His Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary and Fire & Rescue Services, and the Independent Office for Police Conduct are required to check both lists before appointing or employing anyone.

Anyone on the barred list must not be employed in policing roles.

Reviews and Removal from the Barred List

Barred individuals may apply for a review after three years for gross incompetence dismissals or five years for gross misconduct dismissals. Applications are submitted by email to the College of Policing with supporting evidence. The relevant force provides a recommendation, but the College makes the final decision.

Reviews consider the individual’s current suitability, the original circumstances, and the potential impact on public confidence. A successful review does not guarantee re-employment; the applicant must still apply for a role and pass full vetting. The process does not re-examine the original dismissal.

Impact on Policing

By publicly recording dismissals and preventing re-entry of unsuitable personnel, the barred list plays a significant role in maintaining discipline and rebuilding public confidence. Annual statistics published by the College show hundreds of officers added each year, demonstrating the system’s active use.

Overall, the barred and advisory lists represent a balanced approach with firm accountability combined with a structured route for rehabilitation where appropriate.

Lawful Use of Handcuffs by the Police

Check out our articles on Policing by Consent, Police Professional Standards, Police Misconduct Hearings, 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.

Dodgy Magistrates (JP)
Dodgy Judges

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.

“Publicity is the very soul of justice. . . . It keeps the judge himself, while trying, under trial….Where there is no publicity there is no justice”

Jeremy Bentham – Mr Justice Cobb: ‘Justice must be seen to be done’

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.

Categories
Police

Is Crimestoppers Anonymous ?

Crimestoppers

Crimestoppers is widely promoted as the United Kingdom’s leading provider of anonymous crime reporting. The charity asserts on its website that individuals who submit information, whether online or by telephone, benefit from “100% anonymity”.

Your anonymity is 100% guaranteed. We are not interested in who you are, only what you know, so the more detail you give us the better. 

Your computer and mobile phone IP addresses cannot be tracked or saved. It’s completely anonymous

Crimestoppers – Give information anonymously

However, questions have been raised about whether this assurance is fully justified.

An independent investigator and YouTuber known as Crimebodge has conducted a detailed examination of these claims.

In a video released on the 21st April 2026, titled I Tested Crimestoppers’ ‘100% Anonymity’ – They FAILED, he systematically tests the service’s safeguards and identifies several technical and procedural shortcomings that may leave users of Crimestoppers less protected than they have been led to believe.

I Tested Crimestoppers’ “100% Anonymity” – They FAILED

Crimestoppers Online Reporting System

Approximately 80 percent of reports to Crimestoppers are now submitted via its website. While the platform states that it masks IP addresses and does not retain personal data, the investigation reveals a more complex picture.

Report crime anonymously to Crimestoppers
Online – crimestoppers-uk.org
By phone – 0800 555 111

How to report a crime – Police.uk

Analysis of the site shows that it activates 16 third-party trackers before a report is even submitted. These include services from Google, Meta (Facebook), LinkedIn, Snapchat, YouTube, X (formerly Twitter), Stack Adapt, and Hotjar. Data collected can include:

  • IP addresses
  • Geolocation information
  • Browser fingerprints
  • User interaction patterns (such as mouse movements and keystrokes)

The Hotjar tool, in particular, is capable of recording complete user sessions, including content typed into forms. Social media login options further increase the risk of linking activity to identifiable profiles. Notably, privacy notices and cookie consent mechanisms frequently load after many of these trackers have already activated.

The website is also protected by Imperva, a service whose administrators have potential access to raw server logs, including IP data. As a result, the online portal may not offer the level of anonymity that is publicly advertised.

Crimestoppers Telephone Reporting

Crimestoppers maintains that telephone calls are not recorded and that caller numbers are withheld. Nevertheless, several practical vulnerabilities remain:

  • Telecommunications providers routinely retain call metadata, which can be accessed by law enforcement.
  • The use of 141 to withhold caller ID is widely known and may itself attract attention.
  • The 1471 service can often reveal the last caller on landlines.
  • In cases involving serious allegations or potential misuse, police have confirmed they will not always uphold anonymity.

Report crime anonymously to Crimestoppers
Online – crimestoppers-uk.org
By phone – 0800 555 111

If you’re concerned your call could be traced, dial 141 before 0800 555 111, this will block your phone number. 

How to report a crime – Police.uk

The organisation’s policy also reserves the right to assist police in identifying individuals who submit reports deemed to be malicious which is a definition that allows considerable discretion.

Effectiveness and Value of Crimestoppers

Crimestoppers’ own published figures, referenced in the investigation, indicate limited outcomes:

  • 75 percent of all reports are discarded without any police follow-up.
  • Only one in nine reports passed to police results in a tangible outcome.

These statistics suggest that a significant proportion of individuals who submit information may be exposing themselves to potential identification for little discernible public benefit.

Implications of Crimestoppers Anonymity Claims

The investigation does not oppose the principle of anonymous crime reporting. Instead, it highlights the importance of accurate information regarding the actual protections in place. Members of the public who rely on Crimestoppers’ assurances may inadvertently leave digital traces that could later be traced, particularly in high-profile or contentious cases.

The video concludes by recommending that individuals educate themselves about their rights when interacting with law enforcement, rather than depending solely on official channels.

Crimebodge refers readers to his publication, Copper Stopper: How to Protect Yourself From Law Enforcement, available in both paperback and digital formats.

Conclusion

While Crimestoppers undoubtedly provides a valuable public service, its repeated emphasis on “100% anonymity” appears overly optimistic and potentially misleading.

In an environment of widespread digital surveillance and data collection, genuine anonymity demands robust technical measures, transparent limitations, and clear disclaimers.

Check out our articles on Policing by Consent, Police Professional Standards, Police Misconduct Hearings, 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.

“Publicity is the very soul of justice. . . . It keeps the judge himself, while trying, under trial….Where there is no publicity there is no justice”

Jeremy Bentham – Mr Justice Cobb: ‘Justice must be seen to be done’

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.

Categories
Criminal Justice Law Police

National Firearms Amnesty

Firearms Amnesty 2026

Police forces across the country are taking part in a four-week Firearms Amnesty for five types of BRUNI-manufactured side / top-venting blank firers  (TVBFs) which are now illegal to possess following testing by the National Crime Agency and policing.  

The amnesty takes place between February 2nd and 27th 2026, after which anyone in possession of one of the specified TVBFs could be subject to prosecution and up to 10 years’ imprisonment.  

Owners of these TVBFs are being forewarned ahead of the law change, however, and will be given the chance to surrender these weapons to the police without fear of prosecution. 

During the amnesty period, those handing in a BRUNI TVBFs will not face prosecution for the illegal possession and will not have to give their details. However, the history of any live firearms handed in will be checked for evidence  of its use in crime. 

What are TVBFs? 

Top/side venting blank firers (TVBFs) are legal to buy in the UK without a licence by over 18s unless they are readily convertible. Tests by the National Crime Agency and policing have shown that the following BRUNI models are readily convertible and are therefore illegal:  

  • 8mm PAK Bruni BBM New Police blank firing self-loading pistol 
  • 8mm PAK Bruni BBM Model 96 blank firing self-loading pistol 
  • 8mm PAK Bruni BBM Model ‘GAP’ blank firing self-loading pistol 
  • .380R (9mmK) PAK Bruni BBM ME Ranger single-action blank firing revolver 

In their original state TVBFs have a fully blocked barrel designed to discharge only blank cartridges. When discharged, combustion gases vent from the top of the weapon. TVBFs are sold with at least 50 per cent of their visible surface painted a bright colour. However, as well as converting them from blank firers to live firearms, criminals may also paint them black, so they look like an original lethal purpose (OLP) weapon. 

Check out the article on the Firearms Amnesty 2025

Why the Amnesty?

The primary aim of this amnesty is to remove these potentially dangerous weapons from the public domain, reducing the risk they pose when falling into the wrong hands. According to the NPCC, while gun crime in the UK remains relatively low compared to other countries, the conversion of these blank-firing guns into lethal weapons presents a significant emerging threat. Since 2021, over 800 converted TVBFs have been recovered in criminal circumstances, highlighting the urgency of this initiative.

How the Gun Amnesty Works

During the amnesty period, individuals who possess any of these four models can surrender them at local police stations without facing prosecution for the illegal possession of these now-banned firearms. This leniency is intended to encourage those who might have these guns for legitimate, non-criminal purposes to hand them over.

The guns will not only be removed from circulation but will also be analysed to see if they have been involved in previous criminal acts, thereby potentially aiding in ongoing investigations.

Public Response and Implications

The response from the public has been cautiously optimistic. Many see this amnesty as a chance to rectify unintended possession of these newly classified illegal firearms. There’s an acknowledgment among communities that while these guns might have been bought legally or even as souvenirs from trips, their potential for misuse is now too significant to ignore.

Law enforcement officials, including Assistant Chief Constable Tim Metcalfe, the NPCC Lead for the Criminal Use of Firearms, have stressed the importance of public cooperation. “This initiative is about protecting our communities by ensuring these firearms don’t end up being used for criminal intent,” Metcalfe stated. “We urge anyone with these weapons to do the responsible thing and surrender them.”

Legal Implications Post Amnesty

Post-amnesty, the possession of these TVBFs will be strictly prohibited, with severe penalties including up to 10 years in prison for those caught with one. This crackdown is part of broader efforts by UK law enforcement to control the proliferation of firearms and reduce gun-related crimes.

The amnesty also serves as a reminder of the broader issue of firearm conversion in the UK, prompting discussions on the need for tighter regulations on the import and sale of blank-firing guns and other similar devices.

Check out our articles on Policing, Police News, Policing by Consent, Two Tiered Policing, Wasting Police Time, Met Police, Sussex Police, 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.

“Publicity is the very soul of justice. . . . It keeps the judge himself, while trying, under trial….Where there is no publicity there is no justice”

Jeremy Bentham – Mr Justice Cobb: ‘Justice must be seen to be done’

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.

Categories
Law Police

Sack Chief Constable Craig Guildford ?

Craig Guildford Chief Constable

In the United Kingdom, chief constables hold one of the most senior positions in policing, leading territorial police forces and bearing ultimate responsibility for operational decisions.

Their role is pivotal in maintaining public safety, upholding the law and ensuring accountability.

However, when performance falters or controversies arise, mechanisms exist to hold them to account, including dismissal.

This article explores the procedures for dismissing a chief constable, drawing on relevant legislation and safeguards, and examines the high-profile case involving Craig Guildford Chief Constable of West Midlands Police.

The disgraced chief constable of West Midlands Police Craig Guildford retired on the 16th January 2026 with a full pension after eventually giving in to mounting calls to quit over the Maccabi Tel Aviv fan ban. 

The Legal Framework

The primary legislation governing the appointment and removal of chief constables is the Police Reform and Social Responsibility Act 2011.

This Act established Police and Crime Commissioners (PCCs) who are elected officials tasked with overseeing police forces in England and Wales (with equivalent arrangements in Scotland and Northern Ireland under different structures).

Under Section 38(3) of the Act, a PCC has the authority to call upon a chief constable to resign or retire.

This power is not absolute; it must be exercised reasonably and fairly, in line with public law principles.

Historically, the Home Secretary had limited direct involvement in such matters, but recent developments have expanded this role.

In January 2026, Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood announced plans to introduce new statutory powers allowing the Home Secretary to force the retirement, resignation, or suspension of chief constables on performance grounds.

This move aims to address perceived gaps in accountability, particularly in cases where local oversight may be insufficient.

The Policing Protocol Order 2011 further outlines the relationships between PCCs, chief constables, and other bodies, emphasising that while chief constables retain operational independence, PCCs are responsible for holding them accountable.

Dismissal is typically pursued for reasons such as misconduct, poor performance, or loss of public confidence.

The Step-by-Step Process for Dismissal

Dismissing a chief constable is a structured process designed to ensure fairness and transparency. It cannot be done arbitrarily and involves multiple stakeholders.

Here is an overview of the key steps, based on Regulation 11A of the Police Regulations 2003 (as amended):

  1. Initiation by the PCC: The process begins when the PCC proposes to call upon the chief constable to resign or retire. They must provide a written explanation of the reasons, which could include failures in leadership, operational mishandlings, or ethical breaches.
  2. Consultation with His Majesty’s Chief Inspector of Constabulary (HMCIC): The PCC must obtain written views from HM Chief Inspector of Constabulary and have regard to them. This independent assessment helps evaluate the validity of the concerns.
  3. Notification and Response: The chief constable is notified and given the opportunity to make written representations. Copies of the HMCIC views and the PCC’s explanation are provided to both the chief constable and the local Police and Crime Panel (PCP).
  4. Role of the Police and Crime Panel: The PCP, composed of local councillors and independent members, reviews the proposal. They must make a recommendation within six weeks, either supporting or opposing the dismissal, and may consult HMIC. While the PCC is not bound by the PCP’s view, they must consider it. bbc.com The PCP also has veto powers in certain appointment processes, underscoring their scrutiny role.
  5. Final Decision and Suspension: If the PCC proceeds, they issue the call to resign or retire. In urgent cases, the chief constable can be suspended pending the outcome, but this requires similar consultations. publications.parliament.uk The chief executive of the PCC’s office is notified throughout.
  6. Appeals and Judicial Review: A chief constable can challenge the decision through judicial review if they believe it was irrational, unfair, or unlawful. Past cases, such as the reinstatement of Lincolnshire’s chief constable in 2013, highlight how courts can intervene.

With the impending Home Secretary powers, Home Secretary to introduce power to sack chief constables, an additional layer may allow direct intervention, bypassing or supplementing the PCC process in national interest cases.

Safeguards and Challenges

These procedures include built-in safeguards to prevent misuse of power. The involvement of HMCIC and the PCP ensures independent oversight, while the requirement for written explanations promotes transparency.

However, critics argue that the system can be politicised, as PCCs are elected and may face pressures from public opinion or party lines. The government’s defence is that these checks balance accountability with fairness.

Craig Guildford and West Midlands Police

A recent example of this process was the controversy surrounding Craig Guildford, who had been Chief Constable of West Midlands Police since December 2022.

Craig Guildford, who previously led Nottinghamshire Police, has faced intense scrutiny following a decision to ban fans of Israeli club Maccabi Tel Aviv from attending a Europa League match against Aston Villa in November 2025.

A damning report by Sir Andy Cooke QPM DL HM Chief Inspector of Constabulary, Inspection of police forces’ contributions to safety advisory groups: West Midlands Police, found that the ban was based on “exaggerated and untrue” intelligence, including evidence possibly generated by AI, which Craig Guildford later apologised for presenting to MPs.

The report criticised the force’s handling, leading Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood to declare on the 14th January 2026 that she had “lost confidence” in Guildford.

This sentiment was echoed by Downing Street the following day, with No 10 stating it “no longer has confidence” in him.

Politicians from across the spectrum have called for his resignation or dismissal, describing his continued tenure as “astonishing.”

The Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC) is now considering an investigation using special powers.

On the 16th January 2026 the disgraced chief constable of West Midlands Police Craig Guildford retired with a full pension.

The Chief Constable, Craig Guildford, has today retired from West Midlands Police with immediate effect. In doing so, he has acted with honour and in the best interests of West Midlands Police and our region. I welcome his decision.

I am pleased this outcome has been reached having regard to due process and the law. That has prevented what might otherwise have been a complex procedure, that would have caused significant distraction, impact and cost to West Midlands Police and the wider West Midlands. It was important this matter was resolved in a balanced, calm, fair, measured and respectful manner.

West Midlands Police and Crime Commissioner Simon Foster – Chief Constable Craig Guildford retires

Craig Guildford’s brief retirement in November 2024 to safeguard his pension before reappointment has drawn further criticism.

In November 2024, he retired as Chief Constable of West Midlands Police for one month in order to protect his pension, which would otherwise have fallen in value after 30 years’ unbroken service, before taking up the post again. Scott Green served as Acting Chief Constable in the interim.

Chief Constable Craig Guildford West Midlands Police – Wikipedia

Image of Craig Guildford Chief Constable of West Midlands Police – Richard Vernalls/PA and Grok AI

Check out our articles on Policing by Consent, Police Professional Standards, Police Misconduct Hearings, 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.

“Publicity is the very soul of justice. . . . It keeps the judge himself, while trying, under trial….Where there is no publicity there is no justice”

Jeremy Bentham – Mr Justice Cobb: ‘Justice must be seen to be done’

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.

Rule of Law - Open Justice - Policing By Consent