While Shaun Wright, the Police and Crime Commissioner for South Yorkshire, has now resigned, the calls for a power to recall PCCs are likely to continue. We take a look at the possible models for
While Shaun Wright, the Police and Crime Commissioner for South Yorkshire, has now resigned, the calls for a power to recall PCCs are likely to continue. We take a look at the possible models for this.
When Mr Wright initially refused to resign we wrote about the lack of power to remove PCCs from office. One of the measures we discussed was introducing legislation to recall PCCs, as is being considered for MPs. Looking abroad there are a variety of models for recall, and we have considered a few of them.
The Recall of MPs Bill had its first reading in the House of Commons on 11 September and is due a second reading on 14 October. Under the process set out in the Bill, if a sitting MP were imprisoned (and did not successfully appeal) or were suspended for at least 28 days (or 21 sitting days), a recall petition would be opened. This petition would be open for eight weeks and if within this time 10% of registered voters in the constituency signed the petition, a by-election would be called. From a drafting perspective, it would not be difficult to amend the Bill to apply to PCCs as well, possibly with modified trigger criteria, and it seems there is also political will to do this.
Similar systems, where recall can only happen after a specified event, are used in other jurisdictions. For example, in the US state of Washington a recall petition is only allowed where an elected public officer "has committed some act or acts of malfeasance or misfeasance while in office, or who has violated his oath of office". However what exactly constitutes malfeasance or a violation of oath has been the subject of case law and may be a high bar to meet. Other jurisdictions do not use a democratic recall system but allow for elected officials to be removed from office by another elected body; perhaps the most (in)famous examples of this are the impeachment of US president Bill Clinton (although the House of Representatives did not vote to remove him from office) and the threatened impeachment of Richard Nixon (who resigned before proceedings could begin).
Other jurisdictions use a purely democratic system, where the only requirement to remove an elected official is the requisite number of signatories. Again in the US, the most publicised example of this would be the recall of California governor Gray Davis that resulted in the election of Arnold Schwarzenegger. In California anyone may begin a recall petition, and once it has been approved the proponents have 160 days to gain the required number of signatures from registered voters (12% of the "last vote for the office", including signatures from five counties). Similar systems are used in other jurisdictions, although the required number of signatories can vary considerably.
It is interesting to note that, under the system currently proposed in the Recall of MPs Bill, Shaun Wright could not have been recalled as he has not been imprisoned and the very limited ability of the Police and Crime Panel to suspend him had not been triggered. While the Bill is the most likely form of recall to be applied to PCCs (if some form of recall is introduced), it would not, in its current form, have prevented the standoff in South Yorkshire and indeed had Mr Wright been convicted of an imprisonable offence he would have been disqualified under the existing legislation. Whether or not the proposed system is modified, the Wright case will clearly be at the forefront of any discussions of the Bill. The Bill is expected to have its second reading debate on 14 October 2014.
When Mr Wright initially refused to resign we wrote about the lack of power to remove PCCs from office. One of the measures we discussed was introducing legislation to recall PCCs, as is being considered for MPs. Looking abroad there are a variety of models for recall, and we have considered a few of them.
The Recall of MPs Bill had its first reading in the House of Commons on 11 September and is due a second reading on 14 October. Under the process set out in the Bill, if a sitting MP were imprisoned (and did not successfully appeal) or were suspended for at least 28 days (or 21 sitting days), a recall petition would be opened. This petition would be open for eight weeks and if within this time 10% of registered voters in the constituency signed the petition, a by-election would be called. From a drafting perspective, it would not be difficult to amend the Bill to apply to PCCs as well, possibly with modified trigger criteria, and it seems there is also political will to do this.
Similar systems, where recall can only happen after a specified event, are used in other jurisdictions. For example, in the US state of Washington a recall petition is only allowed where an elected public officer "has committed some act or acts of malfeasance or misfeasance while in office, or who has violated his oath of office". However what exactly constitutes malfeasance or a violation of oath has been the subject of case law and may be a high bar to meet. Other jurisdictions do not use a democratic recall system but allow for elected officials to be removed from office by another elected body; perhaps the most (in)famous examples of this are the impeachment of US president Bill Clinton (although the House of Representatives did not vote to remove him from office) and the threatened impeachment of Richard Nixon (who resigned before proceedings could begin).
Other jurisdictions use a purely democratic system, where the only requirement to remove an elected official is the requisite number of signatories. Again in the US, the most publicised example of this would be the recall of California governor Gray Davis that resulted in the election of Arnold Schwarzenegger. In California anyone may begin a recall petition, and once it has been approved the proponents have 160 days to gain the required number of signatures from registered voters (12% of the "last vote for the office", including signatures from five counties). Similar systems are used in other jurisdictions, although the required number of signatories can vary considerably.
It is interesting to note that, under the system currently proposed in the Recall of MPs Bill, Shaun Wright could not have been recalled as he has not been imprisoned and the very limited ability of the Police and Crime Panel to suspend him had not been triggered. While the Bill is the most likely form of recall to be applied to PCCs (if some form of recall is introduced), it would not, in its current form, have prevented the standoff in South Yorkshire and indeed had Mr Wright been convicted of an imprisonable offence he would have been disqualified under the existing legislation. Whether or not the proposed system is modified, the Wright case will clearly be at the forefront of any discussions of the Bill. The Bill is expected to have its second reading debate on 14 October 2014.