Source: United Kingdom London Metropolitan Police
The Commissioner has responded to a High Court judgment published today on a judicial review that sought to challenge Operation Assure.
Operation Assure is the Met’s process, based on national guidance, to consider dismissing officers who can no longer pass vetting. The Met lost the judicial review.
Commissioner Sir Mark Rowley said:
“For more than two decades police leaders have been asking Government for greater powers to sack officers who are not fit to wear the uniform. For two-and-a half-years I have repeated that call and successive Governments have promised change.
“Tens of thousands of good officers joined the police because we care deeply about public safety. The majority of the Met is committed to this drive to clear out those who threaten our collective integrity. This makes us better placed to protect communities.
“Being able to sack officers who fail vetting is critical. Under Op Assure, in the last 18 months
- 96 officers have been sacked or resigned due to vetting removal
- 29 more are on special vetting leave, having lost vetting
- Over 100 more are in the early stages of vetting reviews
“Those we have removed vetting from, had a pattern of behaviour that meant if they applied to work in policing today, we’d never let them in.
“But today’s ruling on the law has left policing in a hopeless position.
“We now have no mechanism to rid the Met of officers who are not fit to hold vetting – those who cannot be trusted to work with women, or enter the homes of vulnerable people.
“It is absurd that we cannot lawfully sack them – this would not be the case in other sectors where staff have nothing comparable to the powers a police officer holds.
“This judgement is focussed on the human rights of Sgt Di Maria. But there are wider human rights at play here, those of the public, and those of colleagues who have to work alongside officers like this.
“We are seeking leave to appeal the judgment, not just for the Met but for law enforcement nationally due to these profoundly damaging implications.
“The judge identified a clear gap in the law, one we have done our best to bridge. But as the judge said, the answer lies in strengthened Police Vetting Regulations.
“So in repeating the same request for two-and-a half-years, echoed by the Casey and Angiolini reports, I am once again calling on the Government today, to introduce new regulations as a matter of extreme urgency.
“It is crucial they are practical, nimble and empowering. They must allow police forces to deal with those who pose risks to colleagues and of course to the public, and must apply to those we have already removed.
“Finally, regardless of the current legal framework, the public of London have my assurance and that of my colleagues that Di Maria and those like him will not be policing the streets or working alongside other officers. They will remain on ‘vetting special leave’, a ridiculous waste of public money but the least bad option until regulations are fixed. “
+++
A judgment has been published in relation to a judicial review heard at the High Court between 15 and 16 January 2025.
Sgt Lino Di Maria is a Met officer who during his police service has received allegations of rape, and other allegations about his conduct towards women.
Under the Met’s ‘Operation Assure’ – a key part of our drive to raise standards and root out corruption – Di Maria’s vetting clearance was reviewed and, in light of the significant pattern of adverse information against him, his vetting was removed.
Sgt Di Maria applied to the court for judicial review, challenging the lawfulness of the Met’s decision to remove his vetting and refer him to gross incompetence proceedings.
He challenged the wider Operation Assure process which is the Met’s process, based on national guidance, to consider dismissing officers who can no longer pass vetting.
The officer would have been dismissed many months ago but for this legal action, which is funded in support of him by the Police Federation.
The College of Policing and Home Secretary were interested parties to the proceedings.
The judgment has found in favour of Sgt Di Maria. It is published here: Di Maria -v- Met Police and others – Courts and Tribunals Judiciary
Background
Operation Assure
In March 2023 the Met became the first police service in the UK to adopt a new process, based on College of Policing guidance and called Operation Assure, to consider dismissing officers and staff who can no longer pass vetting.
It is unacceptable there has never been an explicit legal provision to enable sacking of officers who fail vetting reviews. Policing has asked for this loophole to be closed for more than 20 years. We have been promised for two-and-a-half years that changes will happen but little progress has been made.
The regulations make it too hard to remove those few who undermine the majority. Our own analysis and that of Casey and Angiolini pointed to the need to ‘join the dots’ – using intelligence to spot patterns of behaviour to remove those who should not be in the job. This followed in the wake of significant cases such as Wayne Couzens and David Carrick.
Operation Assure is a programme of prioritised vetting reviews for serving officers and staff where we hold significant adverse information that means we need to review their vetting clearance. In most cases this information has not previously led to a criminal conviction, and, in all cases, not dismissal from the Met.
Operation Assure provides a pathway for the Met to follow if an officer’s basic vetting clearance cannot be maintained. It can lead to that person being dismissed from the Met at a gross incompetence hearing – as their inability to hold vetting clearance makes them ‘incompetent’ to hold a role.
There are hundreds of pages of guidance, law and regulations telling us at length how important vetting is and how it should be done. But these are far less clear on what to do if things change and an officer can no longer can be trusted to hold that vetting, nor how such an officer should be dismissed.
We carefully interpreted the existing guidance and laws as best we could and we filled that gap in the public interest. Operation Assure was the right thing to do in circumstances when the law did not provide a clear way of doing this, and it was supported by the College of Policing. It was a risk, but the issue was too important to ignore and too urgent to wait – the public deserve better.
Police officers are vetted when they join the Met, with vetting renewal every seven-10 years. The framework exists in the Vetting Approved Professional Practice – as set by the College of Policing. The framework also says that vetting clearance should be reviewed upon ‘adverse information’.
The majority of those subject to Assure have worrying patterns of behaviour, mainly allegations of sexual offending. They would not pass vetting if joining the police for the first time today.
The primary pipeline for Operation Assure is Operation Onyx. The Operation Onyx team have reviewed completed domestic or sexual abuse cases against officers and staff for offences from the last 10 years (until April 2022) to ensure those cases were dealt with properly, and revisit them if not via Operation Assure.
Operation Assure to date
- More 300 officers and staff referred into the Assure process overall so far.
- 107 officers/staff have had vetting withdrawn.
- 96 officers/staff have exited the Met (dismissals, retirements and resignations) while in the Op Assure process (including 19 who resigned before their gross incompetence hearing).
- This includes 24 officers/staff dismissed at gross incompetence hearing (or staff equivalent) for failure to maintain vetting.
- Today, 29 officers and staff are in the Met having had their vetting removed and are on vetting special leave. Until the judgment today, 12 of those were due to attend a hearing soon where they may have been dismissed – others had appeals ongoing.
- Approximately 100 officers and staff are at an earlier stage of the Assure process – perhaps at an early review stage, or awaiting their vetting interview or vetting decision.
And:
- 82 have had their vetting retained – which is important to note as it shows the process is fair and proportionate.
- 7 successful appeals.
Examples
- Officer received multiple rape and sexual assault allegations from a number of separate female complainants in 2011-2023. Under Op Assure, officer had vetting reviewed, removed and he was dismissed at a gross incompetence hearing. Criminal charges followed a year later, as further information came to light following his dismissal. This was the first officer we dismissed under Assure, in October 2023.
- Officer had numerous domestic abuse allegations, including rape of ex-partner, and also had received two reports of sexual assault/harassment of colleagues. He had been reduced in rank to a PC in 2022 for a separate matter for misuse of his warrant card while off-duty. Under Op Assure, officer had vetting reviewed, removed and he was dismissed at a gross incompetence hearing.
- Officer committed indecent act on a train and pleaded guilty to outraging public decency – later received a final written warning. Under Op Assure, officer had vetting reviewed, removed and he was dismissed at a gross incompetence hearing.
- Following intelligence checks it was identified that a serving officer was arrested in the USA on charge of endangering welfare of child, having travelled there to meet a 13-year-old girl he had met online. No criminal charges were brought but the intelligence was reconsidered as part of Assure. Officer resigned in May 2023 when he was told he was to have a vetting review.
Judicial Review
A Judicial Review took place at the High Court on 15/16 January between Met officer Sgt Lino Di Maria, supported by the Met Police Federation, and the Met Police supported by the College of Policing and the Home Office as interested parties.
The Judicial Review challenged the legality of Operation Assure, and how it applied to Sgt Di Maria’s case.
The multiple historic and serious allegations against Sgt Lina Di Maria, attached to forensics at Kentish Town, were outlined in the hearing.
His vetting clearance was removed in Sept 2023 and his appeal against this dismissed. In March 2024 he was referred to a gross incompetence hearing due to having no vetting clearance. His particular case was paused pending the outcome of the JR.
MIL Security OSI –