Amendments giving teeth to the Police Complaints Authority were passed on Friday after MPs heard of delays, obstruction and a ?thin blue wall of silence? from officers.

Now Police will be given two months to file a report to the Police Complaints Authority and they must send all relevant information, even if the PCA has not specifically requested it.

PCA members will now be allowed to attend Police investigations and hearings after MPs heard that disciplinary committees sometimes ignored the PCA?s findings.

Currently the PCA receives complaints alleging misconduct, neglect of duty or negligent performance of duty by a Police Officer.

The PCA may direct and supervise an investigation into the complaint and recommend disciplinary or criminal proceedings against an officer.

Home Affairs Minister said: ?Although the Authority has the power to compel information for the purpose of determining whether or not discipline should be imposed, the Authority has no power to conduct or participate in disciplinary proceedings as the disciplinary process reverts to the Police.

?That body actually conducts the hearings and determines the discipline or sanction to be imposed, if any.?

He said the danger was that after considering the investigation report and recommending disciplinary proceedings be instituted, an internal Police hearing could exonerate totally the officer under investigation.

?Further, even where discipline is imposed, the Authority may consider the discipline to be disproportionate to the act complained of.

?In order to assure the public, it is important there should be civilian oversight not only of investigations, but also of the disciplinary stage.?

Police Commissioner Jonathan Smith, in a submission which went into the drafting of the act, pointed out Police delay could frustrate even strong complaints for months with even presiding senior officers admitting it was an abuse of process.

Mr. Smith said: ?The result? The very officer who was investigated, charged and was made subject to the internal hearing was ruled to have a ?no case to answer? submission and was not, at the end of the day ever held accountable for the misconduct, act or omission.

?The reason? Police officers themselves were responsible for every delay at every stage of the investigation and hearing.?

Mr. Horton said letting PCA members attend disciplinary hearings would mean concerns over procedure, bias and discipline imposed could be reported in the PCA Annual Report.

The PCA was set up in late 1998 charged with the oversight of the investigation of civilian complaints. It consists of a chairman and five members appointed by the Governor after consulting with the Home Affairs Minister.

But Mr. Horton said within two years it became evident shortcomings in investigations, hearings and discipline impeded the effective functioning of the PCA.

He said no Policing system can be successful until the public has complete confidence in its integrity and fairness.

Criticism of the way the PCA has functioned have come from all sides, including Police themselves.

A 2003 report by the Her Majesty?s Inspectorate of Constabulary (HMIC) noted the main blockage to resolving complaints lies with the service.

The HMIC said there was a culture among Police that complaints enquiries didn?t matter. Supervisors could not be made to investigate the complaints in a timely manner.

Commissioner Smith also admitted the process was inherently slow with some investigations taking years ? not just months ? to resolve.

He said there was evidence officers deliberately obstructed the system and investigative process and there are examples of the ?blue wall? of silence.

The PCA reported thatat December 2004, four investigations were outstanding from complaints filed in 2000; 18 from 2002; fourteen from 2003; and, thirty-eight from 2004.

Mr. Horton said the PCA had found investigations sometimes failed to pursue troubling gaps and seem to even gloss over questionable actions. Discipline imposed under the Police (Discipline) Orders 1975 ranges from admonition to termination.

Recommendations such as mediation and letters of apology have met with resistance from some Police even though the PCA act allows informal resolution of complaints.

?One problem with this approach is that the informal resolution process is beyond civilian oversight. The Authority is totally reliant on the skills and impartiality of the Officer.

?Some complainants have misconstrued this mechanism ? believing this to be an attempt to cover up or sweep the complaint under the proverbial rug.

?Accordingly, it is recommended the Authority have the statutory power to direct the form of informal resolution.?

Police have also resisted referrals to anger management, the Employees? Assistance Programme or mediation ? leaving the disciplinary proceedings as the only avenue even if the PCA deems it inappropriate.

Mr. Horton said: ?Accordingly, it is proposed that the Principal Act be amended to provide for referral to third party professionals.?

The PCA has recommended letters of apology for some situations. However, some officers fear admitting wrongdoing.

?Indeed, in one case, the Authority was not informed until a full eight months after making an apology recommendation that the relevant Officer had refused to do so. I am pleased to note that this kind of situation has since been rectified.?

Mr. Horton said the PCA should have the affirmative statutory authority to recommend apologies be made.

He said the Police Complaints Authority Amendment Act 2005 was strongly supported by the Governor, the Commissioner of Police and the UK?s Independent Police Complaints Commission.

Opposition Home Affairs spokesman said the amendment was a long time coming.

He said there were a number of outstanding complaints against officers who were suspended on half pay, full pay and two thirds pay which were waiting to be adjudicated on.

?That cannot bode well for the system.? Meanwhile the taxpayer was left footing the bill for inactive Police said Mr. Burgess.

He said complaints against officers needed to be dealt with before court cases against their accusers went ahead.

Government backbencher and former assistant Police Commissioner said officers feared apologising for mistakes and over-reactions for fear they will forever be held against them and thereby damage promotion prospects.

Such officers ?will resort to the time honoured civil rights position and remain silent. Then the matter won?t be resolved,? said Mr. Perinchief.

He said the officer?s punishment should fit the crime in order rather than scare them off from admitting mistakes.

Mr. Perinchief suggested retired Police officers with experience in uniform and out should be used for investigation to bring some perspective.