Duty to cooperate with independent scrutiny bodies
Daniel Morgan Panel · The Report of the Daniel Morgan Independent Panel · Issued 15 June 2021 · Addressed to: Home Office
Source — verbatim from the inquiry
●Inquiry recommendation, Volume 1
In the interest of transparency and public accountability, all public institutions should be under a duty to cooperate fully with independent scrutiny bodies created by Government, such as the Panel.
Daniel Morgan Panel, The Report of the Daniel Morgan Independent Panel · 15 Jun 2021 Source PDF →
Response — verbatim from government
●Home Office
The Home Office introduced a statutory duty of cooperation in February 2020 for serving police officers as part of wider integrity reforms. Police officers now have a responsibility to give appropriate cooperation during investigations, inquiries and formal proceedings, participating openly and professionally in line with the expectations of a police officer when identified as a witness. A failure to cooperate is a breach of the statutory standards of professional behaviour, by which all officers must abide, and could therefore result in disciplinary sanctions. Since December 2017, provisions are in place for proceedings to be brought against former officers to increase public confidence in the accountability of those who committed serious wrongdoing when they were serving, and to ensure that such persons cannot evade being held accountable by the formal disciplinary processes by leaving the police.
Home Office · 22 Jun 2023 Written response →
Evidence trail — what's actually happened since
No published activity has been recorded against this recommendation yet.
Each entry above links to a primary source — gov.uk written statement, consultation response document, or inspection report. The Index does not characterise government intent; it tracks what has been published.
How this page is built
Source and Response are verbatim from primary documents. The Evidence trail records published activity since — written statements, consultation outcomes, inspection findings, parliamentary references. The Index does not paraphrase or characterise intent; it tracks what has been published. Where the evidence is the absence of action (a missed deadline, a slipped timetable), that absence is documented from primary sources rather than inferred.
This recommendation's data is verified periodically against primary sources. The Index is monitored for staleness weekly.