A FRESH allegation of misconduct has been made against Scotland’s top police officer.
Chief Constable Phil Gormley has been on special leave since September while accusations of gross misconduct against him, which he denies, are investigated.
Yesterday the Police Investigations and Review Commissioner (Pirc) received another referral from the Scottish Police Authority (SPA) over alleged misconduct.
The watchdog will now consider whether the conduct, if proved, would amount to misconduct, gross misconduct or neither.
It will also establish whether an investigation is required.
There are currently three investigations by the watchdog over Gormley’s alleged misconduct.
The decision for him to be placed on leave is kept under regular review by the SPA, which will next consider the matter on January 25.
The new allegation came as Scotland’s acting Chief Constable questioned claims made by the SPA over the return of Gormley.
Yesterday a Holyrood committee made public a letter by the authority, who have oversight of the force and its billion pound budget, claiming they had spoken to Police Scotland about managing the immediate return of Gormley.
That letter contradicted a statement made by Justice Secretary Michael Matheson last week.
He told MSPs that he had intervened in November, after learning of the decision by the SPA to allow Gormley to come back to work.
The minister said he had found out about the SPA decision two days after the body had agreed, and less than 24 hours before Gormley was due to start.
In his statement Matheson said he had spoken to Andrew Flanagan, the then chief executive of the SPA, and asked if due process had been followed, and if the SPA had checked with the force leadership and the Pirc who was looking into Gormley. He said he was particularly concerned about Gormley returning to a working environment with people who had accused him of bullying.
Shortly after that intervention, the SPA stood Gormley down again.
The chief’s lawyers accused Matheson of acting in an “unlawful” manner and, in a series of emails, released by Holyrood’s Public Audit Committee earlier this week, shared a draft press release from November 9 that had been edited by both the SPA and the chief . It included the line that the SPA “had taken necessary steps with Police Scotland to ensure suitable arrangements are put in place to support the welfare of all involved parties until the alleged conduct issues are concluded”.
But yesterday, acting Chief Constable Iain Livingstone said that those claims were simply “not true”.
Livingstone said he only saw the release when it was published by the committee.
“That is a draft press release that has not gone beyond Gormley’s lawyers and the SPA, but it makes mention of me, and it makes mention that the SPA had made arrangements to support the welfare of all involved parties. That’s not true,” he said.
“It may have been the intention to have made those arrangements. But it had not happened. That is categorical.”
Livingstone said there was “significant concern” about the welfare of the officers and staff involved in the investigation.
He also said he had not been told Gormley was going back to work, despite his return being imminent.
“You’ve got individual officers and members of staff who had concerns there. I certainly had concerns for them, even if the authority didn’t,” said Livingstone.
Gormley has denied the allegations of bullying.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel