Important note: This is an archive of the website that was formerly at www.morrisinquiry.gov.uk. It is being hosted on the MPA website for archival purposes only and may contain out-of-date information.

This resource from the About section of the Morris Inquiry website contains the Inquiry's terms of reference and commissioning brief.

Sections available here:

• Terms of reference
  • Notes to terms of reference
  • Commissioning brief

Terms of reference

The Metropolitan Police Authority, pursuant to its powers and duties under the Police Act 1996, the Local Government Act 1972, the Greater London Authority Act 1999 and the Race Relations (Amendment) Act 2000, has appointed Sir William Morris OJ (Chairperson), Sir Anthony Burden O St J, QPM, and Ms Anesta Weekes QC to conduct an Inquiry with the following terms of reference:

1. To inquire into the conduct by the Metropolitan Police Service of the following matters in relation to police officers and police staff

1. Policies, procedures and practices for and resolution of complaints and allegations against individuals and grievances by individuals;
2. Policies, procedures and practices for and resolution of Employment Tribunal claims, in particular those claims involving allegations of race or other discrimination against the MPS; and
3. Policies, procedures and practices for and resolution of workplace conflicts falling short of allegations or grievances.

The Inquiry’s attention is drawn to points 1 to 8 in the Notes below.

2. In relation to matters outlined in 1 (i) (ii) and (iii) to establish whether the policies, practices, procedures and structure of the MPS in relation to those matters represent good effective practice in line with key strategies and the statutory obligations of the MPS and MPA under the Race Relations (Amendment) Act 2000 and other relevant legislation.

3. In relation to matters outlined in 1 (i) (ii) and (iii) to establish whether the policies, practices, procedures and structure of the MPS in relation to those matters represent good effective practice when compared to other police forces and public service organisations.

4. To identify lessons to be learnt from the outcome of recent high profile cases (including recommendations made by the Gurpal Virdi Inquiry, and the outcome of the case involving Supt Dizaei).

5. To consider and make recommendations on the role of the Police Authority and its Members in relation to the consideration of high profile or sensitive cases, and the oversight of the performance of the MPS in relation to the matters covered by this Inquiry.

6. To publish a Report with its findings and recommendations.

Notes to terms of reference

The Authority asks the Inquiry to consider these matters in the context of the Authority’s strong support for the Commissioner’s philosophy on integrity and anti-corruption in the MPS.

The Authority invites the Inquiry to consider the following matters, amongst others.

1. Whether the arrangements within the MPS for making decisions on individual cases (including obtaining and considering legal advice) and for the review of decisions and progression of cases, are appropriate and effective.
2. Whether there are disparities in the treatment of black and other minority police officers in relation to grievance, complaint and disciplinary proceedings and hearings.
3. Whether the organisational structures and allocation of functions in these matters within the MPS is effective.
4. Whether appropriate consideration is given to early resolution of grievances and conflicts, through mediation/conciliation or an internal ombudsman or other restorative justice techniques, and whether there are adequate processes to achieve such resolution.
5. Whether there should be arrangements for employment tribunal claims, particularly those involving allegations of discrimination or harassment, to be subject to independent review as part of the MPS handling of such cases, in order to encourage and facilitate efforts to achieve resolution by agreement.
6. Whether it is possible for the investigation of complaints and allegations to be dealt with in a swifter, less bureaucratic and less resource intensive way, so that the investigative effort can be seen to be proportionate to the gravity of the allegation.
7. The extent to which the current requirements of the relevant legislation and regulations hinder the swift resolution of cases.
8. What progress has been made by the MPS on the implementation of recommendations from the Gurpal Virdi Inquiry

Commissioning brief

The Metropolitan Police Authority is the statutory body with responsibility to secure efficient and effective policing for London. The Authority sets the medium term strategy for policing London, publishes an annual policing plan setting out priorities and targets, and holds the Commissioner to account for the performance of the Metropolitan Police Service.

The Authority was created in July 2000 at the same time as the Greater London Authority. There are 23 Members of the MPA: 12 are nominated by the Mayor of London from amongst members of the Greater London Assembly, 4 are Magistrates, 6 are independent members and 1 is appointed by the Home Secretary.

The legal powers of the Authority are the same as other Police Authorities, under the Police Act 1996.

Following the case of Superintendent Dizaei, and a number of other high profile cases in recent years, the Authority has expressed serious concerns about perceptions of unfairness in the way that some internal investigations are handled by the MPS. Members of the Authority are aware of officers from ethnic and other minority groups within the MPS who feel vulnerable and discouraged by what they perceive to be discrimination and disproportionality in the way in which investigations are conducted. More generally, Members have also expressed concerns about the scale of the investigation of complaints against police in general, believing them sometimes to be out of proportion with the gravity of the matters complained of.

The Authority is also concerned whether the MPS deals as effectively as it could with internal conflicts and grievances, especially those involving allegations of discrimination.

The Authority reaffirms its strong support for the Commissioner’s philosophy that integrity is non-negotiable in the police service, and for the determination of the MPS to tackle corruption and impropriety by police officers.

Nevertheless, the Authority decided that, in the interests of public confidence in the MPS, there should be a comprehensive and independent inquiry into these matters. The Commissioner and Deputy Commissioner have indicated their full support of the Authority’s decision.

The Authority is clear that this Inquiry should not be an inquiry into any individual case or investigation, though it accepts that the Inquiry Panel will want to identify and draw on any relevant lessons to be learnt from the handling of a number of cases, as well as taking account of the recommendations of the report into the case of Sgt Gurpal Virdi.

The Authority wishes the Inquiry to commence its work before the end of 2003 and to present its report as early as possible in 2004. If the Inquiry feels that it will be unable to complete its work by the end of March 2004, the Authority would wish to have an interim report with emerging conclusions.

The Inquiry will wish to have regard to

1. The statutory responsibilities of the Police Complaints Authority for the oversight of the police complaints process and for the supervision of investigation of certain categories of complaint/allegation.
2. The statutory responsibilities of the Independent Police Complaints Commission created by the Police Reform Act 2002 to succeed the PCA.

The Authority will meet the expenses of the Inquiry including the appointment of a Secretariat to the Inquiry and Solicitors to the Inquiry.

The Inquiry will not possess powers to compel witnesses. However, given that the Commissioner supports the Inquiry, it is anticipated that the MPS will give its full co-operation to the Inquiry. It is also expected that Metropolitan Police Staff Associations, representative groups of minority police officers and community stakeholder groups will wish to give evidence.

The Authority will leave the Inquiry to determine its own rules of procedure. The Authority expects the Inquiry to hold evidence taking sessions in public in order to engage with all stakeholders openly and transparently, but recognises that the Inquiry should be able to hold some sessions in private if there are good reasons to do so. The Authority also considers that stakeholders and parties should not, as a general rule, be legally represented.

The information on this page has been translated into the following languages, available as PDF documents:

• Bengali
• Chinese
• Greek
• Gujarati
• Hindi
• Punjabi
• Turkish
• Urdu

Portable Document Format (PDF) files require Adobe Acrobat Reader, available as a free download from Adobe.

In this section:

• Terms of reference
  The Inquiry's terms of reference and commissioning brief introduce the aims and role of the Inquiry.
• Protocol
  The protocol indicates how the Inquiry will conduct its business.
• Confidentiality & anonymity
  Information about submitting evidence to the Inquiry where it is wished that the evidence remains confidential and/or anonymous.
• How to contribute to the Inquiry
  This section contains details of how to submit written evidence to the Inquiry.
• Biographies
  Biographies of the Inquiry panel members.
• Translations
  Details about how to get hold of information in languages other than English.
• The Inquiry Team
  A photograph of the Morris Inquiry Team.
• The Inquiry room
  A photograph of the room where hearings take place.