New MDP misconduct rules start 29 December 2025
From 29 December 2025, the Ministry of Defence Police (MDP) changes how it handles misconduct, performance and appeals. The amending rules are set out in S.I. 2025/1263, made on 1 December and laid before Parliament on 4 December, with UK-wide extent. We’ve read the legislation so you don’t have to.
Why the update matters: the 2025 instrument fixes issues in the 2020 framework and aligns MDP procedures with wider police discipline reforms. For students and trainees, this is a live case study in how rules evolve after real‑world use. The official explanatory text on legislation.gov.uk sets this context.
A clear line is drawn on serious crime. If an MDP officer is convicted of an indictable‑only offence (the most serious offences tried only on indictment), that conduct must be treated as gross misconduct under the Regulations. In plain terms, the finding can’t be downgraded.
Outcomes are tightened. Where misconduct or gross misconduct is proved, the decision‑maker must impose a sanction. For gross misconduct, the default is dismissal without notice; only in exceptional circumstances can the outcome be a final written warning or reduction in rank. If neither misconduct nor gross misconduct is found, the case may be sent to reflective practice or closed.
Communication becomes faster and clearer. Notices can be served by e‑mail. Service by e‑mail before 4.30 p.m. on a working day counts that day; after that, it counts the next working day. Post is treated as served on the second working day after posting. This helps everyone know when a deadline really starts.
Accelerated misconduct hearings are easier to trigger in urgent cases. The “special conditions” are now on the face of the rules: sufficient written evidence to establish gross misconduct on the balance of probabilities, and a public interest in the officer leaving the MDP without delay. The relevant authority can decide this without waiting for a particular investigator’s statement.
Former officers are brought into a quicker route. There is now a presumption that cases go to an accelerated misconduct hearing unless the ex‑officer opts for a full misconduct hearing or the authority decides a full hearing is necessary. This balances public confidence with a chance for a full contest where justified.
There is still a way to ask for a full hearing late on. If a case has been sent to an accelerated hearing and the officer could not reasonably notify their preference in time, they may request a switch to a misconduct hearing. A chair or panel will decide if the reasons and timing are reasonable before directing a change.
Performance management is simpler. The old three‑stage process is reduced to two stages. Written improvement notices now run for a default period of three months, extendable up to twelve months where justified. Appeals from the first stage are heard by an “appeal manager” (a designated senior person), replacing the previous “second line manager” model.
Appeals Tribunals are updated too. Notices can be served by e‑mail with the same deemed‑service rules, and in Scotland the tribunal chair must be a legal member of the First‑tier Tribunal under the Tribunals (Scotland) Act 2014. This reflects changes to the Scottish appeals system.
Transitional rules protect ongoing cases. Generally, matters already being handled under the pre‑29 December 2025 regime carry on under those rules. The new provisions apply to fresh referrals on or after commencement, with limited exceptions set out in the instrument for re‑investigations directed by oversight bodies. Always check the dates on any notice.
What this means for you as a learner or practitioner: you can read this as a lesson in due process under time pressure. The law now sets firmer outcomes for the most serious cases, quicker paths for removing officers where evidence is strong, clearer timelines for paperwork, and a simpler performance system. For background on the original 2020 framework and reflective practice, see the base Regulations on legislation.gov.uk.