(File photo) Photo: Marika Khabazi
A senior police officer sexually harassed a female officer, but an internal investigation process was flawed, the independent police conduct authority has concluded.
The woman officer complained to police at the end of a two-month secondment where she was in the senior officer's section under his supervision, prompting an internal police investigation as well as an investigation by the independent police conduct authority (IPCA).
She said the senior officer - labelled as Officer A in the IPCA report - had frequently made inappropriate comments towards her, including some that were sexual. And that this had increased to the point she was concerned his behaviour could become physical and felt unsafe working with him, the IPCA said in a summary report.
"Although it may not have been his intention, Officer A's behaviour towards Officer B nonetheless falls within the definition of sexual harassment as defined by section 108(1)(b) of the Employment Relations Act 2000...," the IPCA said in a report released on Wednesday.
"His attitude and comments in relation to both female officers and female victims of crime lacked judgement and failed to maintain professional boundaries."
Officer A became inappropriately involved in his colleagues' personal lives, the report said, and he "lacked insight into, and was not prepared to take responsibility for his behaviour."
However, during the course of the internal investigation, the IPCA said Officer A resigned from the police - before a disciplinary meeting was able to be held, though he did submit a written response to the allegations.
Police accepted his resignation, and concluded they would not take disciplinary action.
Shortcomings in Police investigation - IPCA
However, the IPCA said the internal Police investigation into the complaints failed to measure up. They noted that Police moved straight toward holding a disciplinary meeting when there had been other steps available to them before that.
"By failing to take formal accounts from Officers A and B [the complainant], Police did not properly inquire into the allegations of sexual harassment," the IPCA said.
"Police should have conducted a more formal employment investigation to ensure concerns about Officer A's behaviour were comprehensively examined. Moving directly to a
disciplinary meeting implied, or at least invited those involved to infer, that Officer B's allegations had already been accepted. The wording of the letter inviting Officer A to a disciplinary meeting also implied acceptance of the allegations."
The IPCA said any predetermination in such processes would not be fair or in good faith.
Both Officer A - the accused officer, and the complainant also complained about the internal employment process.
Both felt it had been too informal and limited, and they each said there had not been good enough communication while the process was being carried out and about what could happen as a result.
Officer A also said he felt the outcome was somewhat predetermined.
The IPCA agreed communication by Police had been "infrequent, informal and, at times, inaccurate."
Police did not offer adequate support to either officer, they said.
While the internal Police investigation was carried out, Officer A had been on an extended period of leave, but instead, Police should have considered suspending him, or moving him during the employment process, they said.
And, "because the matter potentially involved serious misconduct, Police should have completed the employment process, despite Officer A's resignation, and made a finding on the alleged conduct."
Police acknowledge the IPCA findings
In response to the IPCA report, Police said some aspects of their process "could have been better".
Everyone who works for Police deserves to feel safe at work, and to be supported and kept informed through such employment processes, Wellington District Commander Superintendent Corrie Parnell said in a statement.
However, Parnell said Police did not believe the outcome of the investigation into Officer A's conduct had been unfairly prejudiced. And she said communication had been "maintained" with both officers, and support offered:
"In this instance, Officer A's response to the allegations was sought, support was offered to them and communication maintained throughout the process, and we did consider making alternate arrangements such as suspending or moving Officer A for the duration of the process.
"We also maintain support was offered to Officer B through their new supervisor and another senior officer during the process, along with other welfare support," Superintendent Parnell said."
Police would consider the findings, Parnell said.
"Police can always learn from situations like this, and we will continue to do so, to ensure our people are safe and feel safe at work, and are treated fairly."