 |
 |
| Publications |
| Home | Press | Publications | What We Do | Who We Are | Search | Site Map | Contacts | Links | ||||
|
|
|||
 What We Do Police HMIC |
< Previous | Contents | Next >
10.1 This inspection was unusual in that it was brought forward and had a clear link to concerns raised by a single criminal case. However it has been approached using the normal inspection methodology. The purpose of the inspection has also been the usual one, namely to examine the efficiency and effectiveness of SCRO Fingerprint Bureau and make recommendations with a view to securing continuous improvement.
10.2 The substantial and understandable private and public interest in the case of Shirley McKie is entirely proper and HMIC has had a role in addressing aspects of that case. However HMIC has no locus to undertake investigation other than by inspection. Following the declaration by HMIC of the independent experts' conclusions a number of specific steps have been taken by the Association of Chief Police Officers Scotland (ACPOS). The Crown has responded to criminal allegations made about the original identification. These are not matters for HMIC and are not reported on in this inspection.
10.3 Following the 1995 Primary Inspection HMIC concluded that SCRO was operating efficiently with the resources available to it at that time. Five years later HMIC finds that, in respect of the Fingerprint Bureau, this is no longer the case. This view does not derive directly or solely from the examination of the Shirley McKie case but has been informed by it.
10.4 As a result of this inspection, HMIC concludes that SCRO is currently not managing the demands and processes in a fully effective and efficient fashion. This is a commentary on the Bureau as a whole and is not directed at the competency of any one individual. Oversight of the management is shared in a manner that unwittingly has hindered the dynamic development that is necessary to keep this important function at the forefront of professional competence and has perhaps contributed to the current situation. This is not true of all the activity and SCRO has often been at the leading edge of technological advances. The Bureau is under-resourced and has been so for some time. In part that is due to the lack of experts and the obvious point that individuals in that category cannot be created overnight. However infrastructure, administrative support and environment are all areas where improvement could have been delivered. Key areas such as training and quality assurance have not been given the priority and attention that is necessary to secure their worth.
10.5 A number of the short term solutions being put in place to manage demands are unsatisfactory and unsustainable. Without a substantial injection of finance, a radical re-organisation of the provision of fingerprint services in Scotland and more active management of the functions this key element of the Scottish criminal justice system is unlikely to return to full effectiveness and efficiency.
10.6 The action necessary to bring about solutions to the issues addressed in this inspection (and mostly identified by past reviews) lie outside the control of the immediate management and staff at SCRO. They are trying, within the means available to them, to maintain as high a level of service as possible.
10.7 In view of the wide public interest generated in this particular inspection (fuelled by the Shirley McKie case) HMIC took the unusual step of releasing into the public domain the emerging findings of the inspection. This prompted the Association of Chief Police Officers in Scotland to set up the dedicated APRT under the direction of ACPOS President, Mr William Rae, Chief Constable of Dumfries and Galloway Constabulary. The group is led on a day by day basis by Mr Kenneth McInnes, the Deputy Chief Constable of Fife Constabulary. He has a full time staff to assist. HMIC fully endorses this positive and expeditious initiative. Given its existence and their role HMIC has made specific recommendations and suggestions which have been directed at this group as well as the Executive Committee of SCRO, without seeking in any way to undermine the role and responsibilities of the latter. In the executive summary HMIC suggests that in the first instance the APRT be invited to consider all the recommendations and suggestions in this report.
< Previous | Contents | Next >
The information contained on this WWW site is Crown Copyright but may be reproduced without formal permission or charge for personal or in-house use. Privacy and Content Disclaimer.
For general enquiries about this web site email ceu@scotland.gov.uk or fill out our online questionnaire.
