Failure to address corruption within Police
The request was refused by New Zealand Police.
From: Amanda Murtagh
Dear New Zealand Police,
As recent OIA requests to Police may have simply been misunderstood, I will provide greater clarity of the questions in this OIA. Please answer the following important questions in the Public Interest because there is a litany of examples of complaints about the Police not prioritising investigations reported to them.
1. Why do the New Zealand Police not have a formal policy relating to when fraud matters will not be investigated? i.e.: to ensure no bias, no discrimination, no manipulation of facts, transparency and best anti-corruption practice.
2. Why, after 18 months of operation, has the National Integrity Unit failed to have implemented rudimentary guidelines for reasons Police would NOT do something by adopting contrary behavioural practices in Police decision making. I.e.: Although guidelines and SOP’s exist within Policing for Investigating Deception Offences, they only address the matter in a one dimensional approach. Best practice would be to ensure no bias exists by seeking evidence to the contrary on decisions as to whether or not to investigate a crime. The guidelines that currently exist within Police for a District or workgroup responsible for a potential fraud investigation to follow, when the person responsible for a crime is identified and such things as the number of other investigations, the priority and nature of those investigations, and the availability of resources to undertake such investigations, being neither here nor there under such circumstances because the investigation is as much as completed from the start, actually show the decision making system is open to failure and abuse. E.g.: Police may try and clear work backlogs by who screams loudest or maybe they are open to peer pressure, able to look after their friends, encouraged to maintain relationships with work colleagues or at worst, succumb to pressure from those in power etc? How is the integrity of the system maintained?
The importance of such a contrary behavioural approach assures there is no discrimination against complainants using best practices to ensure effective and efficient Policing via transparency in the prioritisation of investigations.
3. Why when Policing is about people, have the Police not implemented behavioural approaches for an elimination strategy of corruption to minimise human error in Policing?
E.g.: Is it because those in power don’t actually want it because it would change the way business has always been done and this loophole serves them; or Police never understood this before or don’t have experienced resources available to them or something else?
From: Ministerial Services
New Zealand Police
Kia ora Amanda
Police has endeavoured to address your concerns contained in your numerous emails but will not reply to further questions that do not comprise requests for information held by NZ Police.
NZ Police National Headquarters Wellington