Jersey Police Complaints Commission Annual Report 2025

Contents

ANNUAL REPORT 2025  1 2

1. Introduction from the Chair  3
2. Executive Summary  5
3. Annual report 2025  6
4. Powers of the JPCC  8
5. Complaints 2025 overview  12
6. Analysis of Complaints  13
7. Informal resolution  16
8. Timings  17
9. General supervision and oversight  18
10. Financial Data  19
11. Training and development for members  20
12. Taser use  21
13. Regular complainants & Vexatious complainant conduct  22
14. Summary  23

1. INTRODUCTION FROM THE CHAIR

It  is  my  pleasure  to  present  the  2025  annual  report  of  the  independent  Jersey  Police Complaints Commission (JPCC).

On 5 December 2025, new legislation was passed in the States Assembly enabling the Jersey Police Complaints Authority (JPCA) to transition to the Jersey Police Complaints Commission (JPCC).

This is the result of extensive collaboration and represents best practice to further strengthen and create a strong and robust oversight regime. The new Law was approved by the States Assembly on 30th March 2022 and the associated regulations were passed on 5th December 2025.

It is important to note that the new legislation represents a modernisation of the law and the functions  of  the  JPCC.   The  JPCC  remains  supervisory  rather  than  investigatory  but nevertheless, the implementation of the new procedures and ongoing responsibilities under the new Law will be a challenging transition for the members of the JPCC and the States of

Jersey Police (SOJP). Commission Members are laypeople who give their time freely without remuneration to oversee, monitor and supervise investigations by the Professional Standards Department (PSD) of the SOJP.

The JPCC has a statutory duty under the Police (Complaints and Conduct) (Jersey) Law 2022, to report annually to the Minister for Home Affairs and present analysis on complaints recorded about the SOJP and the Jersey Honorary Police.

The police complaints and conduct system and processes are key to police accountability. It is vital to securing the Island s confidence in its policing service, both SOJP and the parish honorary  system  that  an  independent  oversight  of  the  police  complaints  system  and supervising investigations, including death or serious injury matters (DSI) takes place in a

considered and effective manner. Our work as the JPCC is undertaken independently of the government, police and all interest groups.

It is the role of the JPCC to ensure that every complaint is properly registered, recorded and comprehensively investigated and, where appropriate, referred to the JPCC for independent oversight and supervision. We are not a mirror image of the Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC) of England and Wales.

Our primary function is to secure public confidence in policing and the complaints procedure by ensuring the police are accountable for their actions and lessons are learnt whilst also ensuring  the  interests  of  the  police  officers  themselves  are  equally  served.   Whilst accountability of individual officers for wrongdoing is clearly important, a significant impact from our oversight and an effective complaints system, can come from themes and learning identified, not just from the complaints process in Jersey, but also learning from best practice in the UK and elsewhere in order to help strengthen policing practice more broadly.

I do hope you enjoy reading our report for 2025 and if the work is of interest to you, please get in touch, we are always keen to consider applications to join the Commission from suitable applicants and are always happy to answer questions from members of the public about the work which we undertake.

Chris Stephenson

Chair, Jersey Police Complaints Commission

2. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

• New legislation 5 December 2025, marking the change from an Authority to a Commission

• 17 complaints referred to the Commission during the year under the old legislation

• 15 complaints concluded during the year, under the old legislation

• 3 complaints made under the new legislation

• 4 new Commission members during 2025

• 2025 Trends – increased complaints concerning officers incivility or conduct but reduced complaints about alleged Use of Force.

3. ANNUAL REPORT 2025

The JPCC - who we are and what we do.

Consistent with every police force in the UK, the SOJP has a PSD, which is responsible for the administration and investigation of allegations or complaints made about both the SOJP officers, the Honorary Police, or both police forces. The role of the JPCC is to oversee, monitor and supervise investigations by PSD. The JPCC does not carry out the investigations, and its members  are  not  trained  investigators.   The  JPCC  is  independent  of  the  police  and government,  and  its  role  is  to  ensure  that  the  investigating  officers  carry  out  the investigations into complaints in a thorough and impartial manner to ensure the police achieve high standards in the handling of complaints, conduct matters and DSI cases.

To  have  confidence  in  the  police  service,  the  public  needs  to  have  trust  in  the  police complaints system. When complaints are made, people should have confidence that they will be dealt with robustly and fairly. We are often challenged and questioned on how local police officers can fairly investigate their own colleagues. This is the accepted norm in the UK in all but the most serious cases. Here in Jersey, all incidents and complaints about the conduct of police officers will be investigated impartially, officers will be held to account for poor conduct, both by PSD and the JPCC and the police will strive to learn and improve from all complaints.  The  JPCC  is  increasingly  prioritising  learning  through  supplementary observations, comments and recommendations at the conclusion of complaint investigations. The  new  Law  provides  significant  scope  for  the  Commission  to  ensure  learning recommendations are effective, targeted and outcomes are achieved in a timely manner.  

Members' services are provided on a voluntary basis. The new legislation allows the Minister for Home Affairs to appoint Members for a period of not more than four years (subject to reappointment up to a maximum of twelve years). The Members who served during the year are detailed below.  

Chris Stephenson Rachel Catchpole David Porter  Allison Le Couteur Jenna Newlands Blake Albert  Simon Burgess Val Cartwright Andrea Robottom Ian Johnson  Tim Rogers

Chair   Deputy Chair  Member Member

Member Member Member Member Member

Member Member

Appointed September 2024  Appointed January 2017  Appointed June 2021  Appointed October 2022 Appointed October 2022 Appointed October 2022 Appointed September 2024 Appointed July 2025 Appointed July 2025 Appointed July 2025 Appointed July 2025

During the year, Rachel Catchpole, Deputy Chair, completed nine years of service in 2025 and has now stepped down from the Commission. I would like to thank her for her valuable contribution over the years and her personal support to me when I took on the role of Chair. Allison Le Couteur has been appointed as Deputy Chair. Jenna Newlands resigned during Q1 of 2025 and left the Commission on 31 March 2025.

All Members of the JPCC are volunteers. They give their time freely and repeatedly to deliver an  important  and  professional  service  -  a  service  which  requires  a  significant  time commitment given the complexity of many complaints under the JPCC's supervision. I appreciate the Members' commitment and professionalism.

The Members of the JPCC are entitled to claim their reasonable expenses. No expense claims were made during the year.

The Commission continues to operate from cost-effective serviced office accommodation in St Helier.

The JPCC employs one part-time administrator, Nicky Le Blond, who provides a critical role in the day-to-day function and administration of the JPCC. Mrs Le Blond has served the JPCC for

some 15 years now and the JPCC would like to acknowledge the dedication, professional and valued support that she continues to provide. The JPCC office is open on Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday mornings between the hours of 08.15 and 12.15.  

4. POWERS OF THE JPCC

• Our primary function is to secure public confidence in policing and the complaints procedure by ensuring the police are accountable for their actions and lessons are learnt whilst also ensuring the interests of the police themselves are equally served.

• We are required to:

supervise the investigation of –

1. any complaint or conduct matter, and
2. any DSI matter.

Secure maintenance of suitable arrangements to handle complaints, conduct and DSI matters. As well as arrangements to obtain and preserve evidence and maintain a register of complaints.

To review prescribed decisions taken by the Deputy Chief Officer, relevant Connétable or Attorney General, and to recommend any of those people to take prescribed action.

To examine and report upon any other relevant matter, if the JPCC considers that it would be in the public interest to do so.

• We have 5 supervisory responsibilities:

The activation of the new regulations means that during 2026 the Commission will undertake a complete refresh of both its policies and procedures to ensure alignment with the new regulations. In 2025, the JPCC supervised three categories of investigation:

1. Those arising from complaints made by members of the public which have not been dealt with by Informal Resolution. Please refer to Section 7 on page 16;
2. those arising from issues referred to the JPCC on a voluntary basis by the SOJP; and,
3. those specifically detailed in the Law, such as investigations arising from a complaint into the death of individuals following contact with the SOJP. The JPCC is not involved

in the oversight of the investigation of complaints which are of an operational nature, unless the matter is specifically referred to on a voluntary basis to the JPCC by the SOJP.  

Complaints made by members of the public against Honorary Police Officers are submitted to the JPCC in the usual manner by the SOJP following a referral by the Connétable of the relevant Parish, usually at the direction of the Attorney General. The Attorney General is responsible for considering how complaints made against Honorary Police Officers will be dealt with. The JPCC believes that the opportunity exists with the  advent of the new regulations to work closely with both the parishes and the Attorney General to ensure the complaints process for the Honorary Police is enhanced and standardised across all parishes.

Voluntary referral cases, not necessarily complaints, are occasionally made by the SOJP on any internal matter, which is the subject of investigation by PSD.  

SOJP's  assessment  of  complaints  could  lead  to  agreed  resolution,  reflective  practice, performance matter, no further action, disapplication or investigation.

Complaint Received

Learning and  

recommendations Police Investigate

JPCC reviews  

findings JPCC Supervises

The need for the involvement of an external police force might arise because of potential conflicts, complex cases, those involving senior officers, or because a case is so serious that it calls for the appointment of an external force. The appointment of an external force must be agreed by the JPCC who would also oversee the investigation. It should be noted that the JPCC  does  not  investigate  complaints;  the  SOJP  receives  the  complaint  and  if  informal resolution is not possible, the complaint is formally referred to the JPCC to supervise. Once PSD completes their investigation, an Investigating Officer's report together with supporting documents, body worn camera and video evidence is submitted to the JPCC. The Commission Member reviews the report, documents and evidence to ensure the investigation has been properly carried out, that the conclusion is reasonable, and that the report has covered all aspects of the complaint. In addition to the Commission Member conducting their review, another  Member  of  the  JPCC  conducts  a  second  independent  review  of  the  complaint investigation to ensure the principal Commission Member has reached a suitable conclusion.  

Death and Serious Injury – DSI

The Law requires that the JPCC supervise all complaints alleging that the conduct of a member of the SOJP Force or Honorary Police Force resulted in the death of, or serious injury to, some other  person.  All  deaths  or  serious  injury  following  police  contact  would  normally  be subjected to an investigation by PSD, regardless of any complaint arising from such an incident and referred to the JPCC for supervision.  In the case of a death, the Viscount's office will be involved.

A death or serious injury after contact with the police challenges the public's confidence in policing.  Therefore,  it  is  essential  that  the  facts  surrounding  such  incidents  are  fully investigated and independently supervised by the JPCC so as to preserve and even enhance public confidence. In certain circumstances, an external police force may be requested to undertake such an investigation.  

Police officers regularly come into contact with some of the most vulnerable members of society and their actions may influence what that person does next. Sometimes deaths or serious injuries occur because things have gone wrong or because, upon reflection, a different strategy or approach may have been more effective. The investigation into such tragic events must  primarily  identify  what  happened  and  why.  It  is  the  role  of  the  JPCC  in  such circumstances to ensure the police learn from any mistakes and to provide the public with reassurance that the police are held to account for their actions.

In the UK the most serious complaint matters or cases involving death or serious injury (DSI), are referred by individual police forces to the Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC) for investigation.

Conflict/Bias

All  complaints where  a  potential  conflict or perceived bias  is  identified  are  taken  very seriously, and steps taken to avoid this situation arising. The JPCC has a process to ensure that there is no conflict between the Commission Member and any complainant or officer(s) subject of the complaint. If a conflict is identified, the complaint would be re-allocated to another Commission Member to ensure impartiality.  

The  JPCC  must  approve  the  appointment  of  the  Investigating  Officer.  Usually,  the Investigating Officer is an officer of the SOJP of Inspector rank or above. However, on occasions the JPCC either requires or agrees to the appointment of an Investigating Officer from an external police force.  

 Meetings

The Chair, Deputy Chair and members where available meet with the PSD every six weeks to monitor the progress of investigations and other relevant issues. These meetings provide a constructive forum to discuss the handling of all associated complaint matters. The SOJP and Honorary Police Officers provide a professional service to the public of Jersey and standards are generally very high. However, on occasions when officers and the organisation fall short

of these standards it is important to have a system that can quickly show what has gone wrong, while ensuring there is accountability at both individual and force level and that lessons are learned. Learning outcomes arising from complaints are centrally managed within SOJP and Learning the Lessons' are disseminated across the organisation. An important addition to the new Law enables the JPCC to make recommendations to the SOJP and Honorary police regarding improvements to best practice and policing policy arising from an investigation. The new Law also makes provision for the JPCC to request information and report  generally  on  outcomes  and  whether  the  police  are  implementing  the  JPCC's recommendations.

Members of the JPCC continue to liaise with officers of the Law Officers Department (LOD) with regular meetings during which current cases are discussed, reasons for any delay are examined and other relevant matters are considered. The introduction of a service level agreement (SLA) between the JPCC, PSD and LOD in 2017 continues to work well, with most cases being concluded within agreed timeframes. However, it is noted that this year some complaint cases have proven more challenging and time-consuming due to their complexity,

consequently it has taken longer to investigate and resolve to the satisfaction of the JPCC. It is proposed to review the SLA given the introduction of the new regulations in 2025 to ensure the SLA stays relevant.

5. COMPLAINTS 2025 OVERVIEW

16 new cases were referred to the JPCC for supervision in 2025; one case was referred late December  2024 which was  inadvertently  omitted  from  our 2024  report; this has  been included in the 2025 figures, making a total of 17 complaints for 2025. Of these 17, 15 were complaints received from the public and there were two DSI referrals.

1 case was brought forward from 2020, 1 from 2022, 4 from 2023 and a further 9 from 2024, bringing the total number of cases under supervision during 2025 to 32.

The  States  of  Jersey Police  also  received  three  complaints during 2025 under  the  new legislation – as at the end of December 2025, of these three, one has been withdrawn and the remaining two were still under consideration.

The Citizens Advice Bureau (CAB) received 107 queries from the public relating to police matters during 2025; of these 107 enquiries, 11 were attributed to making a complaint. It is noted that there is an increase in both figures compared to previous years.

As always, CAB aid interested parties by referring them to the JPCC website and, if needed, assist them to raise their concerns. Data is not available as to whether any initial enquiries resulted in actual complaints.

6. ANALYSIS OF COMPLAINTS

Summary explanation of complaints referred to the JPCC

• 1 complaint relating to use of force.

• 9 complaints alleging abuse of authority.

• 2 referrals involving a serious injury.

• 2 referrals alleging data protection breach

• 3 complaints determined as other' relate to concerns about the handling/timelines of investigations  and  one  that  alleged  sex  discrimination/denial  of  medication  and  an unlawful search.

• All 17 referred cases related to SOJP officers. The table below illustrates the split of SOJP investigations for the last 5 years.

• During the 5 years commencing 2021, there have been a total of 6 complaints recorded against Honorary Officers and 66 complaints have been recorded against SOJP Officers.

• Of the 32 cases under supervision in 2025 (including those carried forward from previous years), 15 were concluded in the year:

Concluded in 2025

Withdrawn, 1 Unsubstantiated, 10

Substantiated / partly substantiated, 4

As noted below, during 2025, 17 new complaints were referred to the JPCC. 13 of these cases have been carried forward to 2026 as they were not capable of being finalised during 2025. The table below relates only to complaints referred during 2025, the 15 concluded on the previous page includes complaints carried forward.

From time-to-time Members of the JPCC will have cause to challenge the findings of the Investigating  Officer  or  to  question  certain  aspects  of  the  investigation  or  specific recommendations. Whenever such a challenge is made, the JPCC ensures that any queries are resolved and that all matters have been concluded to its satisfaction prior to the JPCC issuing a satisfaction statement. This includes ensuring that all elements of a complaint have been dealt with in the report produced by the Investigating Officer. Members of the JPCC also, on occasion, make observations on operational issues, which may be called into question by an investigation. During 2025, of the 15 concluded cases, JPCC members requested further information on 10 cases.

After considering the Investigating Officer's Report, the JPCC must issue a statement as to whether the investigation has or has not been conducted to its satisfaction. From time to time, the JPCC cannot provide a satisfaction statement until it is satisfied with all elements of the  investigation  and  its  findings.  During  2025,  the  JPCC  was  prepared  to  provide  a satisfaction statement for the 15 cases concluded once all the questions and queries had been resolved.

In  cases  where  the  JPCC  are  satisfied  with  the  SOJP  investigation  but  wish  to  provide comments in relation to points of learning or indeed observations that relate to the content of  the  Investigating  Officer's  report,  the  JPCC  will  provide  feedback  through  the supplementary letter process (supplementary letters were provided to SOJP on 7 concluded cases during 2025.

7. INFORMAL RESOLUTION

A review of the Complaints Register maintained by SOJP, revealed that in 2025 the Police registered  88  complaints  under  the  old  legislation,  (2024  –  56  complaints;  2023  –  59 complaints; 2022 – 64 complaints; 2021 – 55 complaints). During 2025, 45 complaints (51%)

were resolved through the informal resolution process (25 cases in 2024; 10 cases in 2023; 14 cases in 2022; 15 cases in 2021). This is an increase from 2024 but as the records show informal resolution was a suitable outcome for many of the complaints.

Resolution of complaints by this process is, in the main, by way of an explanation of police actions or responses, or because of a formal apology. The remaining complaints that have not been referred to the JPCC are either still being considered, have been dealt with by SOJP service  recovery  or  reflective  practice,  have  been  withdrawn,  or  are  incapable  of investigation.

The JPCC conducts a review of the records of all complaints which were informally resolved by SOJP. These complaints are not referred to the JPCC. The JPCC is satisfied these cases were dealt with appropriately and had no cause for concern with complaints informally resolved in 2025.

8. TIMINGS

Case Timelines - Occasionally delays in completing the investigation are unavoidable when the matter is sub-judice [1]  due to an on-going criminal investigation or where delays are encountered whilst engaging with the complainant. Since the introduction of a service level agreement  in  2017  between  the  LOD,  PSD  and  the  JPCC,  the  time  taken  to  conclude supervision of a complaint investigation has generally been within the agreed timeframe.

JPCC timescales - For cases concluded in 2025 that required JPCC to review the investigation (14 cases), the time taken to conduct the JPCC review ranges from 35 days to 350 days. The remaining 1 case was withdrawn. The JPCC acknowledges that improvement is needed in respect of review times but it needs to be remembered that members are volunteers (and many have external commitments) and that the Commission operates a 4 eyes process to ensure internal scrutiny. Often questions are asked and it is important that the Commission members  are  satisfied  in  every  aspect  of the complaint before  providing  a  satisfaction statement. It is proposed to review timelines during 2026 as part of the review of the Service Level Agreement.

9. GENERAL SUPERVISION AND OVERSIGHT

JPCC members visit all Parish Hall s annually to view the register of complaints made against Honorary Police Officers; maintenance of these registers is required by Law. The visit to each Parish is conducted on an annual basis where a review of the details of informally resolved complaints referred to the Attorney General is completed. The 2025 review is complete. As indicated earlier, 2026 will see a review of the Parish Honorary Police Complaints system take place.

The annual review of Parish records by Members of the JPCC, and the review of the SOJP complaint register by the Chair and Administrator is an essential monitoring exercise to ensure that all complaints which are made by members of the public, whether to a particular Parish, or to the SOJP, are, where appropriate, referred to the Commission for supervision.  

The JPCC continues to review its operating processes and procedures and where necessary will amend and adapt its practices to ensure the supervision and oversight of police complaint investigations  are  conducted  in  an  independent,  impartial  and  transparent  manner.  All supervised investigations continue to be subjected to further scrutiny through a second review process by another Member(s) of the JPCC before each complaint is closed.

During 2026 the Commission will be focussed on the implementation of the new regulations. Training and a full review of its process and practice has been undertaken and will continue to ensure the new Commission can meet its future obligations.

In addition, the Commission proposes to review with the SOJP complaint categorisation, data collection and analysis and jurisdictional comparison to support improved handling and management of complaints.

The Commission makes regular presentations about their work to interested stakeholders, and these will continue in 2026

10. FINANCIAL DATA

The budget allocated to the JPCC in 2025 was £46,946. This represents a slight increase over prior year budget. (2024 - £46,311; 2023 - £44,100; 2022 - £44,100; 2021 - £43,000). The Budget sits within Justice and Home Affairs and is overseen for accounting purposes by the Chief Officer of Justice and Home Affairs.

The actual costs incurred during 2025 amounted to £51,361; (2024 - £39,621; 2023 - £57,949; 2022 - £36,682; 2021 - £45,003.94).

The annual budget provides for indemnity insurance, office accommodation costs and for general office running costs. It should be noted that legal fees totaling £8,500 were incurred during 2025 in relation to legal advice. Consultancy fees were also incurred with training for members of the Commission due to new legislation (£5,600). Typically, legal fees cannot be planned for and are often an unbudgeted expense. Prior year legal fees incurred by the JPCC: 2024 £0; 2023 - £12,000; 2022 - £0, 2021 – £10,055.

All  investigation  costs  are  borne  by  the  SOJP,  including  any  costs  associated  with  the appointment of an external police force undertaking an investigation into a complaint.

11. TRAINING AND DEVELOPMENT FOR MEMBERS

In addition to joint supervision of complaints allocated to new Members and mentoring provided from experienced Members, each Member will spend a night on patrol with the SOJP  for  familiarisation  of  custody  suite  processes  and  more  generally,  operational procedures.

In preparation for Members to be operationally ready to deliver the procedures under the new law, we have engaged legal support to develop the procedural polices, processes and manuals alongside training materials for existing and future members.

During 2025, the Authority recruited four further members in anticipation of the changes to become a Commission; new members underwent a mentor programme and suitable SOJP training (including elements of new officer training provided to new police recruits by SOJP).

12. TASER USE

Although all cases of death or serious injury (DSI), following police contact, must be referred to the JPCC, for example in the case of a death or serious injury resulting from the discharge of a firearm, the JPCC has no direct involvement in the deployment of Taser and would only become involved if the deployment resulted in referral to the JPCC following a complaint, death or serious injury arising from its use.

PSD provides the JPCC with monthly updates on the number and type of taser deployments. During 2025 out of the 25 incidents reported involving the use of taser, there were 3 fired. When compared to prior years (2024 – 12 incidents, no fired; 2023 – 34 incidents, 1 fired; 2022 – 35 incidents, 4 fired; 2021 – 55 incidents, 10 fired). Over the past five years (2021 – 2024) there have been a total of 161 taser incidents reported with 18 incidents where the taser was fired (the total number of incidents includes all instances of taser being withdrawn from its holster). The Commission does not see Taser usage as disproportionate.

13. REGULAR COMPLAINANTS & VEXATIOUS COMPLAINANT CONDUCT

A complaints system that enables easy and effective access is essential for all complainants. All complaint processes give rise to a small number of cases and individuals who pursue their

complaints in a way that might be considered unreasonable by the average member of the public.

The JPCC recognises all complainants have the right to be listened to, respected and have their  complaint  taken  seriously  and  investigated  in  a  fair,  impartial  and  independent manner. This should be irrespective of the number of complaints that the complainant in question may previously have made.  

The JPCC acknowledges that complainants have, in some instances, experienced distressing events and circumstances which may have influenced their behaviour and lead them to complain.  They  may  behave  unacceptably,  or  be  unreasonably  persistent,  or  make unreasonable demands in their contact with the police, which can impact on the welfare of those dealing with the complaint, who must equally be given the right to be listened to and respected.

The JPCC will always adopt a fair and consistent approach when reviewing a complaint where persistent  or  unreasonable  complainant  behaviour  is  a  factor.  This  is  aligned  with  the Government of Jersey customer feedback policy, which includes managing unreasonable conduct in addition to the SOJP policy on dealing with vexatious or frivolous complainants.

14. SUMMARY

The JPCC is committed to its role of supervising and monitoring complaint investigations in an impartial, independent and thorough manner. The new law and transition into the Jersey Police Complaints Commission will provide opportunities for further developing practice, and

in particular to take account of changes and improvements in the UK and other jurisdictions.  

Whilst accountability of individual officers for wrongdoing is clearly important, a significant impact from our oversight and an effective complaints system, can come from themes and learning identified, not just from the complaints process in Jersey, but also learning from best practice in the UK and elsewhere to help strengthen policing practice more broadly.

As  noted  elsewhere  in  this  report,  the  SOJP  and  Honorary  Police  Officers  provide  a professional service to the public of Jersey and standards are generally very high. When officers and the organisation fall short of these standards it is important to have a system that can quickly establish what has gone wrong, while ensuring there is appropriate accountability. Learning outcomes arising from complaints that are taken up by the SOJP Learning the Lessons Forum' provides an important emphasis to a culture which is more open, reflective of mistakes and with a greater emphasis on learning, development and improvement whilst maintaining and ensuring accountability. An important addition to the new law will enable the Jersey Police Complaints Commission (JPCC) to make recommendations to the SOJP and

Honorary police regarding improvements to best practice and policing policy arising from an investigation. The new law also makes provision for the JPCC to request information and report  generally  on  outcomes  and  whether  the  police  are  implementing  the  JPCC's recommendations. The JPCC welcomes these changes and the facility to audit whether its recommendations have been implemented.  

The  proportion  of  complaints  being  satisfactorily  concluded  through  the  SOJP  Informal Resolution process was 45 (51%); which is higher than last year. 2024 – 25/44%; 2023 – 10/17%; 2022 - 14 /22%; 2021 – 15/28%. The Commission considers this to be a positive development for all parties, police and complainant.

In prior reports the JPCC has reported on the positive effects that the wider deployment of body worn cameras (BWC) has had on resolving disputes, in particular incidents involving anti- social behaviour where alcohol has been a factor. Body worn camera evidence continues to provide critically important evidence throughout an unfolding incident for all involved. There have been occasions when cameras have not been activated sufficiently in advance of an

incident and significant evidence has not been available as a result. The JPCC recognises that some situations and incidents can escalate very rapidly and anticipating such a change in circumstances is difficult and challenging. Nevertheless, it is in everyone s interests that BWC are activated as early as possible.

Comparison with UK police complaints data  

It is not possible to make a direct comparison between complaints made against the police in Jersey and complaints made against separate police forces in England and Wales as there are differences in the classification of complaints and systems together with variables on how they are recorded.

2026 will be a year of transition for the Commission. Our workload and responsibilities will increase but our members are enthused about the transition and look forward to working with the SOJP and Honorary Police to ensure that complaints are both handled in a timely and professional manner as well as ensuring that learning derived from complaint resolutions is applied to avoid repetition in the future.

Chris Stephenson - Chair

Jersey Police Complaints Commission

[1] Sub-judice is generally invoked when the complainant, or the officer subject to the complaint, is facing a criminal charge. The complaint investigation is placed on hold until the criminal charge has been dealt with. However, the investigation into the complaint may proceed with the informed consent of the complainant to waive their right to sub-judice.