'Policing left in a hopeless position': Mark Rowley slams court's decision to rule against Met Police crackdown on officers 'who cannot be trusted to work with women'

Sergeant Lino Di Maria successfully mounted a legal challenge, supported by the Metropolitan Police Federation, after having his vetting removed over sexual assault allegations, which he denies.

He was found to have no case to answer in respect of misconduct allegations, and argued that having his vetting removed without the accusations being proved is a breach of his right to a fair trial.

Justice Lang said: “In my judgment, the defendant’s powers do not extend to the dismissal of a police officer by reason of withdrawal of vetting clearance.

"Dismissal is a matter which should be provided for in regulations made by the Secretary of State. This results in an anomalous situation where officers who do not have basic vetting clearance cannot be dismissed by the defendant."

She continued: "In my view, that anomaly could and should be resolved by regulations."

Lawyers for the Metropolitan Police had previously told the court that a procedure under current performance regulations allowed officers to be dismissed if clearance was withdrawn.

However, Justice Lang said she did not consider this "fit for purpose" adding: "The process deprives the officer of any meaningful opportunity to challenge a finding of gross incompetence."

LATEST DEVELOPMENTS

• EXPOSED: Ex-policeman blows whistle on politicians and mosques who influenced grooming gangs investigation
• Police accused of bringing 'Sharia law to British streets' after naming man who set fire to Koran
• 'Enough is enough' Emma Webber demands statutory inquiry into Nottingham attack and calls for end to 'mental torture' after NHS and police failings

Justice Lang continued: "The panel merely confirms a decision that has already been made, by an internal vetting regime which is not Article 6 (right to a fair trial) compliant. Where basic vetting clearance has been withdrawn, the only outcome open to the panel is dismissal."

Sir Mark Rowley said the ruling has “left policing in a hopeless position”.

He told a press conference: “Today’s ruling on the law has left policing in a hopeless position. We now have no mechanism to rid the Met of officers who were not fit to hold vetting – those who cannot be trusted to work with women, or those who cannot be trusted to enter the homes of vulnerable people.

"It is absolutely absurd that we cannot lawfully sack them. This would not be the case in other sectors where staff have nothing like the powers comparable to police officers."

Rowley said the Metropolitan Police Federation were "perverse" for choosing Sergeant Di Maria’s case to mount the legal challenge. He told reporters: "To me, it seems perverse that the federation have chosen a case such as this.

"Di Maria, who had allegations of rape, sexual assault and harassment against him, that they want to see someone like him stay in policing. I know many, many colleagues within the organisation – and particularly women colleagues who’ve spoken publicly about this, are outraged that they are spending their subscriptions fighting cases like this."

A Home Office spokesman said: "It is essential for public confidence in policing that the strictest standards are upheld and maintained. Individuals who fall below the high standards the public expects should not be police officers.

"That’s why this government is acting rapidly to introduce new, strengthened rules that will help forces dismiss officers who cannot maintain vetting clearance.

"There are clear processes already in place for forces to deal with any officer found facing allegations of misconduct, and it is critical that they use these to remove personnel who clearly fall short of the standards that we and the public expect."