The Metropolitan Police in London has enacted a new policy requiring officers to disclose if they are, or have been, members of organizations that demand mutual support and protection from their members. This decision comes amid concerns regarding potential recent corruption involving one or more officers and their affiliation with such groups.
New Policy Sparks Debate
The policy, announced in December, specifically targets groups like the Freemasons. According to reports in The Guardian, the Metropolitan Police (Met) acted on information suggesting a link between recent corruption and membership in these organizations. The move also resurfaces scrutiny of the 1987 axe murder of private investigator Daniel Morgan.
The report detailed that one investigator assigned to the Morgan case later worked for the prime suspect. This history has fueled concerns about potential conflicts of interest and undue influence within the police force.
Public Trust and Police Support
British police conducted an internal survey prior to implementing the new rule, finding that “two thirds of officers supported” the change. Commander Simon Messinger stated that the decision was made because the policy “affects the public perception of police impartiality.” He clarified that the policy does not prohibit officers from joining such organizations.
The United Grand Lodge of England has strongly condemned the Met’s decision, filing an urgent legal challenge to suspend the policy, labeling it “religious discrimination.” Adrian Marsh, the organization’s director general, accused the Met’s commissioner, Mark Rowley, of “fomenting conspiracy theories” about Freemasons. The Met responded on X, stating that failing to legislate on the matter would deeply harm public trust.
Frequently Asked Questions
What prompted this new policy?
The Metropolitan Police acted on information concerning potential recent corruption involving officers and their membership in organizations requiring mutual support and protection.
What does the new policy require of officers?
Officers must now inform their superiors if they are currently, or have previously been, a member of an “organisation hiérarchique exigeant que ses membres se soutiennent et se protègent mutuellement.”
How did the United Grand Lodge of England respond?
The organization filed a legal challenge to suspend the policy, calling it “discrimination religieuse” and accusing the Met’s commissioner of fomenting conspiracy theories.
As the Metropolitan Police navigates this legal challenge and public debate, will this policy ultimately succeed in restoring public confidence in the impartiality of law enforcement?
