Photo: RNZ / Patrice Allen
A senior male police officer found to have sexually harassed a junior female officer he was supervising, resigned from the police before disciplinary action could be taken.
The police watchdog has since found the officer's inappropriate behaviour amounted to serious misconduct.
An investigation by the Independent Police Conduct Authority (IPCA) found the officer became overly involved in his colleagues' private lives and his behaviour was at times inappropriate.
Authority chair Judge Kenneth Johnston KC said in the summary report that his attitude and comments to both female officers and victims of crime lacked judgement and failed to maintain professional boundaries.
The junior officer complained about the sustained inappropriate behaviour from her supervisor, which included comments of a sexual nature. The behaviour occurred throughout the woman's two-month secondment to the senior officer's section and intensified towards the end.
While his behaviour was verbal, the frequency and nature of it escalated and created an increasingly uncomfortable atmosphere for the woman.
It got to the point where she believed it could escalate and become physical, and she felt unsafe working alongside him.
Once the secondment ended, she made a formal complaint to police in October 2023, who moved to hold a disciplinary meeting.
Both officers raised concern about the process, the limited and informal nature of the inquiry, the lack of communication around the process itself and possible outcomes.
The senior officer took an extended period of leave and resigned before the disciplinary hearing could take place.
He then provided police with written responses to the allegations and police later confirmed that given the resignation, they would take no further disciplinary action.
The authority found the officer lacked insight and was not prepared to take responsibility for his behaviour.
It said as someone in a position of leadership, he should have exercised better judgement and professionalism in his behaviour towards others.
Although it may not have been his intention, his behaviour fell within the definition of sexual harassment under the Employment Relations Act 2000.
The IPCA concluded:
- That police should have conducted a more formal employment investigation
- That the failure to take formal accounts from both officers meant they did not properly enquire into the sexual harassment allegation
- That a letter sent to the senior officer implied he accepted the allegations
- That communication between both officers about the disciplinary process was infrequent, informal and at times inaccurate
- That they should have considered suspending or moving the senior officer during the employment process
- Because it potentially involved serious conduct - the disciplinary process should have been completed despite the officer's resignation
Corrie Parnell Photo: RNZ / Angus Dreaver
Wellington District Commander Superintendent Corrie Parnell said both officers had raised concerns about the way the allegations of inappropriate behaviour were handled and police agreed some aspects of the disciplinary process could have been handled better.
He said both officers were offered support through the process and police had considered alternate arrangements, like suspending or moving the senior officer for the duration of the process.
Police did not believe the senior officer was unfairly prejudiced by the decision to commence a disciplinary process and form preliminary views.
"In saying that, police can always learn from situations like this, and we will continue to do so, to ensure our people are safe and feel safe at work, and are treated fairly."
Parnell said everyone who worked for police deserved to feel safe at work, and to be supported and kept fully informed when they were involved in a workplace allegation and/or disciplinary process.
