'Independence' of the IPCC

We have all read and heard assertions that the IPCC is a fully independent police watchdog and those of us able to see through the lies and spin are aware that this is all tosh.

The IPCC website assures us that:

“No member of the Commission may have served as a police officer.”

Oh really? So what about Peter Goode, Regional Director of the Cenral Region?

Peter Goode has served in the police service in Leicestershire for 31 years. He retired in October 2003 at the rank of Chief Superintendent. And let’s not forget Barry Simpson, Deputy Chief Executive Officer and Director of Corporate Services who served nine years as a police constable in Fife.

What method of incisive, investigative journalism did I employ to dig up this damning contradiction to the claims of the Comission? Er.......... I read it on the IPCC website.

The commission asserts its independence of “the police, interest groups and political parties” . It’s the political parties that are rather misleading. It implies that the commission is independent of politicians which is clearly not the case. Nick Hardwick, Chair of the Commission which is funded by the Home Office, is “accountable to the Home Secretary” (as is clearly stated on the Commission’s website). The Home Secretary obviously doesn’t welcome allegations of misconduct or abuse of power within the police force and he who pays the piper... etc.. However, the Home Office is not a political party, it is part of the government. Likewise, the government, undoubtably peopled by members of the political party in office and is committed to the policies of that party, is not, in itself, a political party. It is the government.

The IPCC is far from independent of those who have a vested interest in whitewashing any dubious actions of the police. We have seen this “independence” and “transarency” in action most notably in the case of the killing of Jean Charles de Menezes:

Lana Vandenberghe, a former secretary at the Independent Police Complaints Commission was working for the commission at the time of the Jean Charles de Menezes shooting. Consequently, she had access to documents and photographic evidence that contradicted the police assertion that he had vaulted a ticket barrier and had been wearing suspiciously bulky clothing for the warm weather. She waited for two weeks to see what would happen. Would the commission pick up on this? Would the commission act on this information? Apparently not. The commission had decided to sit on it and Vandenberghe was forced to leak the documents to ITN. She was suspended and subsequently resigned from the commission.

The Chairman, Nick Hardwick concluded that targeting an individual on the basis of looking a bit foreign and shooting him seven times in the head while he was held down by police officers and then lying to imply that his behaviour and dress gave reasonable grounds for suspicion did not constitute any impropriety on the part of the police. No doubt, the Home Secretary, to whom he is accountable would not have looked favourably on any other conclusion.

Independent? I would say not. Transparent? Most certainly..... but only because they’re so crap at lying.