Ombudsman's Office
page under construction
The NSW Ombudsman's Office is said to be a key accountability mechanism for police behaviour. With most complaints, the police investigate themselves, finds nothing amiss, and the Ombudsman approves the outcome.
The main complaints made to Human Rights Monitors about police conduct concern rudeness, aggression and offensive language; the refusal of many officers to wear identification badges, and threats of arrest against those photographing officers who are not wearing badges or who are making arrests.
We do not make complaints to the Ombudsman's office about rudeness or offensive language. There would be so many compalints that there would be little time to do anything else.
On the other hand, the photographing or videoing police officers making arrests results in important evidence to substantiate allegations of unnecessary violence when making arrets. Such evidence is also important to substantiate claims that police use violence in a random manner to target particular protesters for outright assault. Such techology is also important in relation to identifying officers in the case of illegal activity or misbehaviour.
Even with photographic evidence, identification badges are often the only way that a police officer can be identified if a complaint is to be made. Even a high-quality photograph of the officer is met with the response that the police "cant identify" the officer concerned.
Consequently, Human Rights Monitors confine our complaints to the Ombudsman where we have seen such behaviour first-hand and where we have supporting video or photographic evidence.
Unfortunately, the Ombudsman's office has refused to uphold any of the complaints we have made.
Reproduced below are photographs of police officers not wearing identification badges at protests in Sydney. Although we have sent the photographs and a complaint to NSW Police, the police on each occassion has refused to disciplien the officers or even talk to them. In referring the matter back to the Ombudsman's officer, the Ombudman's officer has reviewed and then declined to take any further action.
Anatomy of a complaint
An example of the complaints system is that of the Newcastle Climate Camp protest on 13 July 2008. On 15 July 2008, Human Rights Monitors sent a written request to the Ombudsman's office saying that riot police officers were not wearing their identification badges, as required by internal police procedures.
Allocated reference number C2008 / 5292, the Ombudsman's office passed the matter to the Northern Region Area Command of NSW Police.
Four months later, on 12 November 2008, police sent a standard letter saying that "Your correspondence has been recorded...[but] further investigation or enquiry in this matter is at this time declined..." No further explanation was given.
Asking the Ombudsman's office to review the matter, the Ombudsman's office replied that "I am satisfied that police have generally handled the complaint effectively and in a timely manner" and declined to take further action. (letter 27 November 2008).
Identical or similar responses have been received in relation to police officers taking off their badges at the anti-Pope protest in July 2008 (ref:C2008/ 5360);
complaint 6 (ongoing)
The large protest on 18 January 2009 against Israeli action in the Middle East saw the attendance of a large number of riot police, despite earlier protests being peaceful and without incident. Most of the riot officers were not wearing visible identification. Here, the officer has "riot squad" visible on the viewer's right. His name / number would normally be on the viewer's left, but is blocked by a radio in his top pocket.
Complaint 6 (cont)
The same officer? Another officer with identification obscured. As police officers are often of similar build, the wearing of sunglasses and caps makes them difficult to discribe with accuracy unless identification is clearly visible. The poor design of uniform makes easy identification normally impossible.
Complaint 6 (cont)
Another officer with identification obscured. This time, with a small fire- extinguisher style device containing a contaminant spray, which can be fired on people, causing intense pain.
Complaint 6 (ongoing)
Most of the police riot officers on the day could not be identified because of absent or obscured identification.
Senior officer (complaint 6)
The insignia on her shoulder shows this officer to be a very senior officer. She appeared to be second in command on the day. All police officers asked by a Human Rights Monitor said they did not know her name. There is no nameplate showing her rank, station or name.
23 January 2009: complaint made to Ombudsman's office.
3 February 2009: Ombuds. office confirms receipt of complaint and allocated reference C2009/335.
Complaint 5 (ongoing)
On 18 January 2009, a large protest took place against Israeli policies in the Middle East. Volunteers from Human Rights Monitors were in attendance to photograph police officers not wearing visible identification. On taking one photograph, a police officer threatened the photographer with arrest (without lawful authority).
Shown is one of a series of photographs sent to the Ombudsman's office complaining of the officer's conduct.
23 January 2009: complaint made to Ombudsman's office.
3 February 2009: Ombuds. office confirms receipt of complaint and allocated reference C2009/490.
Complaint 4: ref:2009/335 (ongoing)
At a protest in Sydney on 29 December 2008 against Israeli bombings in the Gaza Strip, police officers on horses had no visible identification. Wearing helmets, the officers may have been difficult or impossible to identify if horses had been used to run into or trample protesters.
4 Jan 2009: complaint made to Ombudsman's office about police officers failing to wear visible nameplates.
12 Jan 2009: chasing acknowledgment of complaint.
21 Jan 2009: letter received from Ombudsman refusing to oversee the complaint and refering the matter to NSW Police so that NSW Police may investigate themselves.
Complaint 4: photo 1
Complaint 4: photo 2
Complaint 4: photo 3
Complaint 4: photo 4
Complaint 1: Ref: C2008 / 5292
15 July 2008: complaint made to Ombudsman's Office about police officers at the Newcastle Climate Protest not wearing visible name plates.
18 July 2008: call made to Ombudsman's Office, which confirmed that complaint had been received and allocated Ref: C2008 / 5292.
A few days later, the Ombudsman's office wrote to say that it was referring the matter to the Northern Region Area Command of NSW Police so that the police could investigate the complaint. Waiting for Northern Region Area Command to acknowledge complaint.
August 2008: still waiting.
September 2008: still waiting.
October 2008: still waiting.
12 November 2008: police send a standard letter saying that "Your correspondence has been recorded...[but] further investigation or enquiry in
this matter is at this time declined..."
27 November 2008: on furthering the police response to the Ombudsman and making the representation that police officers not wearing their identification badges at the Newcastle and Sydney protests were not isolated incidents but a routine matter at political protests, the Ombudsman's office replied in a letter dated 27 November 2008 "I am satisfied that police have generally handled the complaint effectively and in a timely manner" and declined to take further action.
Complaint 3: Ref: 2008/6201
Ombudsman refuses to accept complaint regarding the use of emergency lock down powers under Part 6A of LEPRA at the Newcastle Climate Camp held on 13 July 2008.
The detailed 13-page complaint was made by the Climate Camp Legal Support Team on 8 August 2008.
In an email dated 30 August 2008, the Ombudsman's Office said that it was refusing to accept the complaint on the basis that "After careful consideration of your letter, I have determined that there is not enough detail to refer specific allegations of police misconduct to the NSWPF at this stage."
A copy of the complaint letter and the response can be found at the bottom of the Climate Camp 2008 page.