An independent review into police handling of last year’s occupation of Parliament has found it “served the public of New Zealand well” in dealing with the difficult and sometimes violent three-week event.
However, officers on the ground did not have access to enough body armour, and new recruits were thrown into the confrontation without adequate preparation.
Read the full IPCA report here
Read the full reponse from police here
The Independent Police Conduct Authority has been investigating the policing of the occupation of Parliament’s grounds, which ended in violence on March 2.
"Almost all police officers involved exercised professionalism and restraint in their dealings with the protesters," Judge Doherty said in his IPCA report. (Source: 1News)
The authority received 1905 complaints, over 85% of them from people not present at the anti-mandate protest, which descended into a toxic mix of misinformation and hostility.
Led by chair Judge Colin Doherty, the inquiry interviewed more than 350 people, including protesters, police and then Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern. Hundreds of hours of footage have also been analysed.
The review is designed to provide an independent assessment of the information police had, the decisions police made, tactics, and whether the approach taken as the protest evolved was lawful, proportionate and appropriate.
Judge Doherty said, on the whole, police dealt with the situation well.
“Frontline officers faced extreme provocation and violent behaviour from some of the protesters, and a level of public disorder rarely seen in New Zealand,” he said.
The report ruled out political interference, but some were not so sure. (Source: 1News)
“In the face of that, almost all Police officers involved exercised professionalism and restraint in their dealings with the protesters. It is commendable that Police were able to end the illegal occupation of Parliament grounds on 2 March 2022 with as few injuries and as little damage to property as they did."
The report found that police were provided good information by intelligence staff about the developing protest in advance of February 8, but didn’t sufficiently consider the “particular risks” posed in the wake of similar protests overseas.
The police watchdog assessed a record number of complaints related to the occupation. (Source: 1News)
Failed February 10 operation
An effort to end the protest on February 10 failed, with police officers unprepared - in terms of planning, resourcing, staff and equipment - and staff weren’t clearly communicated with.
A 24-hour delay may have helped, with the operation undertaken hurriedly by an “under-resourced” unit.
1News’ Aziz Al Saafin looks the violent end to the anti-mandate occupation at Parliament. (Source: 1News)
Protesters were initially not given required warnings under the Trespass Act, and while the degree of force used to make arrests was reasonable, the arrest process and recording of evidence was deficient.
This saw many charges dropped.
Police were also unable to deal with so many arrests and people in custody, and the operation should have been called off earlier when it was apparent it would fail.
Containing the protest
The report found the approach of containing the protest and keeping law and order, while planning a larger operation to bring it to an end, was the correct one.
However, the demands of everyday policing and Covid-19 staff shortages made it difficult for Wellington police to plan. A more “flexible process” for providing support should have been in place.
Police were unsuccessful in towing vehicles as operators were reluctant to help. The footprint of the protest was successfully reduced by the use of bollards.
Day of violence on March 2
The report found while there were isolated incidents of potentially excessive reactive force by police, “they generally acted professionally and with remarkable restraint”.
There was “substantial and sustained” violence directed at officers – Molotov cocktails, bricks, paving stones, fireworks, poles, bottles, and a knife, among other things, were hurled.
“The Authority found that all the tactics Police used to defend both themselves and others on March 2 were justified in the circumstances,” it wrote.
People were filmed removing bricks from the ground and tossing objects at police. (Source: 1News)
“These included skirmish lines, shields, pushing and striking, pepper spray, batons, weapons of opportunity (fire extinguishers, fire hoses and paving bricks), sponge rounds and deflating vehicle tyres.
"Police were also justified in carrying firearms (though none were used on the day).
"The Authority has therefore found that the Police operation on 2 March 2022 to clear the grounds of Parliament, the Victoria University campus, the Cathedral and the surrounding streets was conducted professionally and successfully.”
It found, however, police did not have enough hard body armour – “police did not adequately equip officers during the March 2 operation”. There was ad-hoc and inconsistent decision making as to when officers would wear body armour as the day progressed “which unnecessarily exposed some unprotected officers to a significant risk of injury”.
Newly graduated officers used in the operation were not adequately prepared and equipped, although it was reasonable for them to be used.
“I could not identify who was in charge of me,” one new officer said.
Lance Burdett told Breakfast tactics were also "out of date", with the IPCA's report into police handling of the occupation coming out today. (Source: Breakfast)
“If I wanted to ask someone senior, I would just ask anybody who I didn’t recognise from college, figuring that they were more superior to me.”
It was “undesirable” that recruits who had not graduated were needed to secure ground officers had reclaimed.
There were still problems with evidence collection, which resulted in some charges being withdrawn.
Current laws ineffective
The authority also found the current law is not fit-for-purpose for the mass public disorder situations on February 10 and March 2, including the law of trespass, laws governing how arrests may be lawfully effected, and the handling of property left behind by trespassers.
Recommendations
The IPCA has recommended:
- there should be a multi-agency review of laws governing a public order event
- more hard body armour should be purchased
- the development of an operating model for public order policing – as a priority
- the development of standard operating procedures for policing the Parliament precinct
Police respond
Police Commissioner Andrew Coster welcomed the release of the report and was pleased it found officers had been professional and restrained.
It accepted there was room for improvement, however.
“We have completed a significant amount of work already, such as ordering more equipment, providing staff with more training, and beginning a full review of public order policing.”
“We agree that, ideally, more officers would have had been fully equipped with specialist protective equipment. At the time of the operation we had exhausted all options to do so, including utilising partner agencies.”
He said staff that were best equipped were at the front of the skirmish lines, with those less well protected and trained towards the back “as much as possible”.
“As protesters became increasingly violent toward staff on March 2nd, some staff became exposed to greater risk. Officers took action to mitigate these risks, which included deploying sponge rounds, withdrawing and other tactics.
“Extensive effort went into staff safety, to the extent possible in this context, and I am confident that health and safety was at the forefront of our minds before, during and after the operation.”
Specific complaints
Hundreds of complaints were made about two particular incidents.
One officer is accused of putting his full weight on a man's head - known as planking. The same officer allegedly used the same tactic on a young person, which was referred to in over 350 complaints.
"While the young person did not wish to speak to us, we are conducting a combined investigation into these two incidents."
The IPCA also received 432 complaints about officers allegedly ripping the clothes off a female protester, dragging her by the hair, holding her on the ground and smothering her with a blanket.
"In fact, our enquiries, which included speaking to the woman herself, identified that she had deliberately stripped down to her underwear and covered her body in coconut oil to make it difficult for Police to grab her," the report found.
"The officer consequently lost her grip on the woman as she attempted to arrest her and was only able to regain control of her by grabbing the woman’s hair. Police officers placed a blanket over the woman’s torso to ensure her dignity."
SHARE ME