Police officer in Sean Rigg case not allowed to resign, court rules

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/sep/25/police-officer-sean-rigg-court-andrew-birks

Version 0 of 1.

A police constable under investigation following the death of a mentally ill musician has lost a legal battle to be allowed to resign in order to become a Church of England minister.

An inquest jury found that police used “unsuitable” force after arresting Sean Rigg, 40, for attacking passersby and officers in London six years ago. He was held in Brixton after being arrested in Balham.

PC Andrew Birks, who was working at Brixton police station when Rigg died there in 2008, has been suspended while a watchdog’s investigation continues. The Metropolitan police have refused to allow him to leave the force.

Birks, 39, began a high court challenge over what he said was an unfair decision. Senior officers initially agreed to let him leave but changed their decision after the Independent Police Complaints Commission said resignation would allow him to avoid any potential disciplinary proceedings.

Following a hearing in London, a judge dismissed the action brought by Birks.

Mrs Justice Lang said the officer had applied for judicial review of the decision of the Metropolitan police on 14 August to maintain his suspension from duty under the Police (Conduct) Regulations 2004 “and to refuse to consent to his resignation in order to become a minister in the Church of England”.

Birks applied for urgent consideration of his claim on grounds that he was due to be ordained on 28 September 2014.

The judge said: “If he is not ordained on that date he will not be able to take up the office of curate in the parish of Portslade, Sussex, and will have to vacate the church accommodation which he and his partner are already occupying.”

The Metropolitan police said in a statement after the ruling: “Our decision to suspend PC Birks, and rescind his resignation, was taken after careful consideration and was based on a unique set of circumstances.

“These included ongoing public interest in the case, the need to maintain public confidence in the accountability of police officers and to allow the IPCC to complete their current investigation.

“We also recognise the personal impact that this decision has had on PC Birks. We respect the decision of the judge today, who has considered all the evidence.

“Six years after Mr Rigg’s death, his family and our officers are still waiting for a conclusive outcome.

“There has been much speculation about what took place on the night that Mr Rigg died, but what is important now is that there is a full and thorough investigation based on evidence to finally establish the facts.”

Welcoming the ruling, Rigg’s sister, Marcia Rigg-Samuel, said the family hoped the decision would set a precedent for others “who face the same dilemma as my family, following a death in custody”, and “avoid upset and anguish when an officer leaves the police service before an investigation into his or her conduct is complete”.

She said: “I insist that the IPCC vigorously and speedily move on with the investigation for all concerned and this government immediately seek cross-party support for a change to the law making it mandatory for officers to remain in post where misconduct investigations are ongoing.

“Coupled with that, these IPCC investigations need to be properly funded so they can be competent and fast.”

In her ruling, Lang said Birks had considered joining the priesthood in 2001. He was advised that he should first get experience to equip him for the demands of a ministry. “To that end he became a police constable. He joined the City of London police in 2001 and transferred to the Metropolitan police service in 2008. There are no recorded findings of misconduct against him.”

The judge described it as an exceptional case in which Birks was “required, against his wishes, to remain a serving police officer for an indeterminate period of time – which I accept could be as long as two to three years if the IPCC finds there is a case to answer – during which time he will not be able to work, either as a police officer or in any other capacity”.

She said: “He is being prevented from pursuing his religious vocation to be a minister, for which he has trained for many years.”

Rejecting his case, the judge ruled: “Given the gravity of the allegations against the claimant, namely, that his actions caused or contributed to a death in custody, the public interest requires that he should remain in the force to answer any charges of misconduct which may be brought against him and the other officers involved.”