Suella Braverman 'risked influencing police decisions' by accusing officers of bias over Palestine marches
10 September 2024, 06:12
A review has warned that the former home secretary Suella Braverman risked influencing policing decisions when she accused senior officers of bias over pro-Gaza marches.
Listen to this article
Loading audio...
The Inspectorate of Constabulary has said she may have impinged on the operational independence of the Metropolitan Police when she called for a pro-Palestinian demonstration to be banned on Armistice Day last year.
Ms Braverman accused senior police officers of “playing favourites” with certain protest groups, in an article in The Times.
She then posted on social media, that if a Palestine Solidarity Campaign march was allowed to go ahead on Remembrance Day, there would be “an obvious risk of serious public disorder, violence and damage”.
In a report, commissioned by Ms Braverman before she was forced to resign from government, the watchdog has said: “The Metropolitan Police Service responded by stating that there was no power in law to ban the march as there was a lack of intelligence indicating the risks that had been suggested by the then Home Secretary.
Suella Braverman insists she was a 'pro-police Home Secretary'
“The [law] refers to powers for the Home Secretary to intervene in matters of public safety or national security, but this is only if advised to do so by His Majesty’s Chief Inspector of Constabulary.
“On this occasion, she didn’t ask for such advice. Had it been sought, the Chief Inspector of Constabulary would have advised that such an intervention risked impinging on the operational independence of the Metropolitan Police Commissioner.”
Suella Braverman faced heavy criticism at the time, from senior police leaders and other politicians, including Labour’s now home secretary Yvette Cooper.
She described it as a “dangerous attempt to undermine respect for the police” adding that it was “deliberately creating division”.
The investigation by the inspectorate into impartiality and activism within policing also heard from a number of officers who said they “had never known a time when senior politicians were so openly politicising” the police.
Chief inspector Andy Cooke said: “The operational independence of chief constables is a cornerstone of policing in the UK.
“Chief constables must be held to account for how efficiently and effectively they carry out their duties. There is a delicate balance to strike between these equally important concepts.
“Chief officers told us that they often experience what they believe to be improper pressure or interference from significant political figures. We found that overt attempts to influence operational policing challenge the police’s impartiality and could reduce public trust.”
The review also criticised Rishi Sunak’s team when he was in Number 10 over the response to a video that showed an officer call Gideon Falter “openly Jewish” as he wore a Kippah skull cap.
The head of the campaign against antisemitism had been trying to walk across a road, while pro-Palestinian demonstrators marched in their thousands, in April.
The inspectorate noted that “a source from Downing Street said the then Prime Minister was “appalled” by the behaviour of the officer,” which led to calls for Sir Mark Rowley to resign as Met Commissioner.
It goes on to say: “It wasn’t until [nine days later] when the media released extended footage of the interaction, that it became apparent the officer had acted with patience and professionalism.”
The report has warned that senior politicians should take great care to make sure they are in possession of the full facts before making public statements that can have a detrimental effect on the public perception of police impartiality.
