FAQ Group: Police

A witness officer is an officer who an IIO investigator has reason to believe can provide material evidence with respect to an incident under investigation, and who is not a subject officer with respect to that investigation.

The statutory duty on a Witness Officer to fully cooperate has been interpreted expansively by the Supreme Court of British Columbia, including the duty of a Witness Officer to attend IIO interviews as and when the IIO directs, that the attendance of Witness Officer’s counsel and union representatives at IIO interviews is at the IIO’s discretion, and that the production of pre-interview disclosure to a Witness Officer is at the discretion of the IIO.

Information provided by a Witness Officer is inadmissible in evidence in court in a civil proceeding for remedies against that officer in relation to the matter under investigation.

A Subject Officer means an officer whose presence, action or decision, whether on or off duty, is reasonably believed to have been a significant contributing causal factor in the serious harm or death of any person.

A police officer’s name will not generally be released to the public, except:

•  if the police officer is criminally charged, Crown Counsel will release the name of the police officer;
•  if the police officer is involved in a fatality which is brought to a coroner’s inquest, the police officer’s name will be made public during that process; or
•  if the police officer’s name has been previously publicly released and if, after consultation with the Privacy Commissioner, it is determined that keeping the officer’s name confidential would serve no useful purpose.

Yes. A police agency may advise the media that an incident has occurred and that the IIO has been notified. Only the IIO may address the media about IIO investigations. Before issuing new media releases, it is protocol for IIO media relations and police agency media relations to consult and ensure neither agency’s release unduly prejudices any investigation underway.

At any point during an investigation, Subject Officers are welcome to contact the IIO to obtain an update on their file via their  Liaison Officer.

Once an investigation is complete, if it is forwarded to Crown Counsel with the BC Prosecution Service (BCPS) and Crown does not approve charges, they will issue a Clear Statement that provides a brief chronology of the evidence and the rationale for the decision. Clear statements can be found on the BCPS website.

If the Chief Civilian Director does not refer the file to Crown Counsel, they may choose to publish a public report or media release explaining the decision on the IIO website where it is in the public interest to do so.

The Appeals and Special Prosecutions Section of the BC Prosecution Service reviews all IIO files in order to determine whether charges should be laid.

If the CCD determines that a file must be referred to Crown Counsel, the IIO must obtain the birth dates of any Subject Officers to enter into the JUSTIN database.

Under the Police Act, a Witness Officer is compelled to cooperate with an IIO investigation. This will generally include participating in an interview and submitting materials, including notes and documents, for review by the IIO in the course of its investigation. A Witness Officer may also be required to assist in a reconstruction of the incident. Information provided by a Witness Officer cannot be used against that Officer in criminal or civil court.

Subject officers may be asked is they will voluntarily participate in an interview with IIO investigators. The provisions of sections 8.7, 8.8 and 8.10 of the Guidelines and Expectations with Respect to the Conduct of IIO Investigations apply to any such interviews.

IIO investigators will communicate any requests to a Subject Officer either verbally or in writing, typically via the Liaison Officer. Where the Subject Officer is represented by legal counsel, the request will be directed to the lawyer.

Whenever the IIO is notified of a critical incident, the IIO has jurisdiction. There are times when the IIO on-call Director may recommend the Chief Civilian Director (CCD) decide not to investigate based on the information received which would appear to suggest there is no serious harm or no connection to police action. In other circumstances, the IIO may conduct a preliminary investigation to confirm whether the incident meets the two-part test for sustaining jurisdiction: confirmed death or serious harm, as defined, and a nexus or relationship between the injury and an officer’s actions. If the preliminary investigation confirms death or serious harm and a nexus, the IIO will continue to investigate. If not, the CCD may decide to discontinue the investigation and will take no further action.