London police faced a crisis as scores of specially trained firearms officers refused to carry guns following a murder charge against one of their colleagues. This development has deepened the existing sense of crisis in Britain’s largest police force, the Metropolitan Police Service, which has been grappling with scandals and institutional issues such as racism, sexism, and homophobia. Commissioner Mark Rowley, head of the Met, called for greater clarity on the rules governing the use of lethal force and legal protections for officers, but this raised concerns about accountability within the police force.
Deborah Coles, director of Inquest, a charity focused on state-related deaths, argued that giving firearms officers more legal protection would make accountability virtually impossible and effectively grant them a license to kill. She emphasized the importance of ensuring that the police are not above the law.
The decision by some firearms officers to refuse carrying their guns came after murder charges were filed against an officer involved in the shooting of an unarmed Black man in south London. The incident occurred on September 5, 2022, and resulted in the death of 24-year-old Chris Kaba, who was struck by a single gunshot fired into the car he was driving.
Reports suggested that up to 300 officers had chosen not to carry firearms, though the exact number was not confirmed by the Met. The department stated that a number of officers had stepped back from armed duties as they reviewed the implications of the charging decision for themselves and their families. Discussions were ongoing with these officers, and some had already returned to their firearms duties.
To address the situation, the Ministry of Defense initially agreed to provide backup for counter-terrorism operations, but this assistance was no longer required by midday on Monday. However, a limited number of armed officers from other departments continued to provide support in different areas of policing.
Home Secretary Suella Braverman, who oversees policing, announced a review of the rules governing police use of force in response to the tensions over armed officers. Commissioner Rowley, in a letter to Braverman, highlighted the need for increased legal protections for officers. He stressed that while police need to be held to high standards, current rules are cumbersome and pose a risk of prosecution even when officers follow their training.
Rowley noted that officer-involved shootings are rare in London, with officers firing their weapons an average of less than twice a year during approximately 4,000 armed incidents. This equates to just 0.05% of armed operations resulting in shots fired by police.
The issue of armed officers comes amid Commissioner Rowley’s efforts to restore public trust in the Met following several scandals and the acknowledgment of widespread racism, misogyny, and homophobia within the department. Rebuilding public confidence is crucial for the Met, as British law enforcement operates on the principle of policing by consent, meaning that most officers do not carry guns and rely on public cooperation.
Former chief constable Peter Fahy acknowledged the discontent among officers and the lack of confidence in the Home Office and the Independent Office of Police Conduct but reiterated that police are subject to criminal law like any other member of the public. His comment highlighted the wider concerns felt by officers regarding being misunderstood and unappreciated.
This incident raises important questions about the regulations surrounding police use of force and the accountability of officers. As discussions continue, it remains essential to strike a balance between providing officers with necessary legal protection and ensuring accountability and public trust in the police force.
