Police and Crime Commissioner will not be investigated over WhatsApp message deleting policy
and live on Freeview channel 276
At the time, in a letter to Chief Constable Richard Lewis, he described feeling “under siege” following the report, with the work he was carrying out having an impact on his health.
Advertisement
Hide AdAdvertisement
Hide AdHe had explained his office had approved the use of the WhatsApp on personal phones, which had helped during the ongoing coronavirus crisis, and this followed a procedure for a weekly “cleardown” information was not held for longer than needed on personal non-work devices.
However, this meant the information would not be available for disclosure under the Freedom of Information (FOI) requests, with the Independent Office for Police Conduct now issuing a response to the issue raised by Cleveland Police and Crime Panel.
He said he had used the app on his own phone and cleared messages regularly “not with any intention to conceal anything, but simply due to storage capacity limits,” but had considered if that had been the right approach and said it was “right and proper” independent authorities considered that.
“To be clear, the deleted messages were of a mundane, logistical nature and did not, to my recollection, include anything significant to the work of the force or OPCC” he said.
Advertisement
Hide AdAdvertisement
Hide AdToday, Friday, October 30, an IOPC spokesperson said the matter would now lie with the panel to consider.
They added: “Following a thorough assessment, we have decided we will not be investigating the complaint as, in our view, it does not constitute or involve, or appear to constitute or involve, a criminal offence.
“The information provided suggests the new WhatsApp policy was introduced prior to the relevant FOI request being received and that messages were deleted in line with that policy.
“We are therefore required to return this matter to Cleveland Police and Crime Panel to be handled in a reasonable and proportionate manner.”
Advertisement
Hide AdAdvertisement
Hide AdThey added it was aware the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) is considering the circumstances separately and should further information come to light which may impact on its decision, it would take another look at the matter.