Power suspension: Disciplinary action possible

An independent report into the suspension of Jersey's former Police Chief could lead to disciplinary action.

Chief Minister Terry Le Sueur says he's urgently considering the issue.

In an email to States members on Wednesday night, Senator Le Sueur said: 'As you may be aware, I have now received the Report into the suspension on 12th November 2008 of the (former) Chief Officer of the States of Jersey Police ("the Napier Report").

'Having read this Report carefully, I am of the view that there could possibly be grounds for disciplinary action arising out of the report. I am taking advice on this and considering it as a matter of urgency and anticipate making a decision on this shortly.

'I have also sought appropriate advice about the publication of the Napier Report prior to any disciplinary proceedings which may, after consideration, take place and I am advised that publication might prejudice any disciplinary process which may be required.

'Although I have shared the Napier Report in confidence with the Deputy of St. Martin, he has acknowledged that it is important for any disciplinary process that may be required to be conducted properly so that there can be no question of any impropriety. The Deputy of St. Martin has therefore agreed to continue to hold the Report in confidence.

'I am grateful to the Deputy for his understanding in this matter and I hope that all States members will similarly respect the need to conclude any disciplinary issues prior to publication. I confirm that on the conclusion of any disciplinary issues, the Napier Report will be published in a full and unredacted form'.

But not all States members are happy about the report being witheld at present, including Deputy Hill. In an email to the Chief Minister last night he wrote:

'Dear Terry, Thank you for your reply but you are well aware that it falls far short of what I am asking. Your email below was sent without any discussion with me therefore I have not agreed to hold the Report in confidence for what seems to be an indefinite period.

'The purpose of my email was for you to show some leadership in an impartial way. You have been in possession of the Report since 13th September and must have been considering disciplinary action. When you gave me a copy of the Report on Friday 17th September you told me you were considering disciplinary action and were seeking advice. However it was envisaged that the Report would be circulated soon after my return from holiday. I believe you have had ample time to seek advice to determine whether to instigate disciplinary action. Many States Members have been of the view that the suspension of the former Police Chief was not conducted in a satisfactory manner and that was endorsed by the Royal Court some months later. The evidence has therefore been to hand in the public domain for over 18 months.
You have stated that are taking advice and considering it as a matter of urgency and anticipate making a decision on this shortly. However in my opinion It would appear that you are trying to stall the process in the knowledge that the Napier Report could be of some value in a Court Case which is in progress. I do not want to prejustice any disciplinary case but equally I do not want to deny justice to an ongoing Court Case.
'
All that said I am encouraged by your assurance that this is now a matter of urgency but that is what you told me last week when you thought you were going to a statement. However, after some thought, I will take no further action in this matter before 2pm tomorrow (Thursday 7th October 2010.). This should be sufficient time for you to complete your consideration of any possible disciplinary action. If you do decide that disciplinary action is appropriate and the individual person is named and make a statement to that effect, then I will seek to avoid any action which might cause difficulties to the disciplinary process. However, if the current uncertainty is allowed to continue then I will take such action as appears to me to be in the public interest.

'While I recognise that this position may cause you some difficulty, I can only repeat that this exchange relates to a report which has been in your possession since 13th September 2010 and which is subject to growing speculation regarding its contents. I believe that it is now time to bring this speculation to an end by prompt and decisive action. At this time I am content for you to continue to take the lead on this matter but reserve all of my options if no clear decision is taken within the timescale I have indicated.

Regards

Deputy F. J. (Bob) Hill, BEM.'

Deputy Paul Le Claire also sent the following email to the Chief Minister:

'Dear Terry, you said to me last week I must call things as I see them. So here goes on this. I see this as a continuation of a culture of concealement and denial in order to deflect blame and accountability for poltical expediency.
Please demonstrate that I am mistaken ?
Kind Regards

Paul

P.S. I am not the only one in this assembly or the island who sees and smells.

The Chief Minister replied: 'Dear Paul, I have already stated that I will publish the Report in a full and unredacted form as soon as possible. This does not sound like concealment to me.

Terry'.

Deputy Trevor Pitman sent the folloowing email to the Chief Minister:

'Terry, Why all this red-herring talk of 'publication'? As States members - unless there really is something to hide, whether till certain dates have passed or otherwise - it is outrageous that we are still waiting a month after you received it; going on toward what...nine odd months since we were told it would take six weeks to complete! The question I would put to you, Terry, is whatever happened to all your talk of 'inclusive' government? We are not talking 'publication' even though it seems the preferred way this COM does business is media first, elected representatives last - we are asking as elected representatives to SEE the report and whatever, good, bad or indifferent might be in it. Also, for me at least, whether this latest many months overdue document was worth it or not. Surely this is not too much to ask? If we are not to be allowed to see it then I genuinely believe that Bob has an obligation to take it on himself to publish as he suggests.

Trevor.'

Power suspension: Disciplinary action possible