Scotland senior officer conduct rules change 26 November

On 26 November 2026, Scotland will start using a rewritten set of conduct rules for senior officers in Police Scotland. The regulations were made on 29 September 2026, laid before the Scottish Parliament on 1 October 2026, and published on legislation.gov.uk. They do not create new crimes. They change the process for how allegations of misconduct and gross misconduct are assessed, investigated, heard and published. **What this means:** if you want to understand police accountability, this is really a rulebook story. It decides who gets to investigate, who chairs a hearing, when the public can know a case is happening, and how quickly a senior officer can be removed if the evidence is already strong.

The biggest institutional change is that allegations will now go to the Police Investigations and Review Commissioner, often shortened to PIRC, without delay. Under the explanatory note, the old model in which the Scottish Police Authority carried out the preliminary assessment is being removed. PIRC will now decide whether the alleged conduct would amount to misconduct, gross misconduct, or neither. **Why that matters:** the same body will now make the first legal assessment in every case. If PIRC decides the allegation would amount to gross misconduct, it must investigate. If it looks like misconduct rather than gross misconduct, PIRC can decide whether an investigation is needed. If it looks like neither, the matter can still be sent back for improvement action, performance management or no further action.

One of the more important technical fixes is about rank. The new rules do not only cover someone who is already a senior officer when a complaint lands. They also cover conduct from 26 November 2026 onwards where a constable later becomes a senior officer, whether permanently or temporarily, or was temporarily acting at senior rank when the conduct happened. **What this closes off:** an officer should not slip into a different process just because a promotion happened after the event. At the same time, the transitional rules keep older cases under the old system if the allegation was already in play before 26 November 2026, or if the conduct itself happened before that date. That is a fairness point as much as an administrative one.

The hearing stage is also being recast. Instead of the older set-up, misconduct hearings will now be heard by a three-person panel led by a legally qualified chair chosen by the Lord President from the First-tier Tribunal for Scotland. The other two panel members will be appointed by the Scottish Police Authority: one policing expert and one independent lay member. The regulations also create misconduct pre-hearings, which are private case-management sessions used to sort out dates, witness issues, legal arguments and disclosure before the main hearing starts. **What this means in practice:** hearings are meant to be tighter and more structured. The chair must aim for the first day of the misconduct hearing to be no more than 100 working days after the misconduct form is treated as given to the senior officer, unless the interests of justice require more time. The Commissioner, rather than the Authority, will present the case against the senior officer. That does not guarantee speed, but it does put a clock on the process.

There is also a new fast-track route called an accelerated misconduct hearing. This can be used when there is enough written or documentary evidence to show, on the balance of probabilities, that the conduct amounts to gross misconduct, and when the public interest means the officer should stop holding office without delay. In those cases, the Commissioner can certify the case and send it to an accelerated hearing rather than the full ordinary route. **Here is the teaching point:** accelerated does not mean anything goes. The officer must still get notice, papers, representation rights and a tribunal-style panel. But the timetable is much shorter. The hearing date must usually be set for between 10 and 15 working days after notice is given, and the panel can impose a final written warning, dismissal with notice or dismissal without notice.

Several changes are clearly aimed at openness. Hearings will generally be held in public, and the panel chair can require the Scottish Police Authority to publish notice of a hearing on its website. After a decision, a report must usually be published for 28 days, with reasons and any disciplinary action, although details can be withheld, redacted or anonymised where there is a good reason such as criminal proceedings, witness safety, privacy or wider public interest. The explanatory note also says complainants must be told when a case is found to have no case to answer, along with the reasons, unless information has to be limited for defined public-interest reasons. **Why this matters to you:** public confidence is not only about whether rules exist. It is also about whether people can see those rules being used. These regulations move senior-officer discipline closer to a model where the public can follow the shape of a case, even if some details still have to stay private.

Another notable shift is how the rules treat witnesses and vulnerable people. The new text builds in a definition of trauma-informed practice. It also lets the chair support a witness by allowing remote evidence, the use of a screen, evidence in private, or the presence of a supporter. A parent or guardian can attend when the witness is a child. The regulations also allow joint investigations where a case involves both a senior officer and another constable, but they insist on a written strategy, separate statutory roles and no single merged report. **This is worth pausing on:** legal process can sound dry, but procedure shapes whose voice is actually heard. If a witness is frightened, retraumatised or practically unable to attend, the truth can be harder to test. These changes are an attempt to make participation possible without giving up due process. The regulations also state that a police representative or lawyer cannot answer questions on the senior officer's behalf, which keeps direct accountability with the officer.

The regulations also reshape suspension and sanctions. PIRC can now recommend suspension to the Scottish Police Authority, and the Authority must take that recommendation into account. Before suspending someone, it must consider whether temporary redeployment to other duties or another location could work instead. On penalties, verbal warnings are being removed. Written warnings will last 18 months, final written warnings two years, and a later panel can extend a final written warning up to five years in some cases. Appeals against disciplinary decisions will go to the First-tier Tribunal for Scotland. **What it means overall:** according to the legislation.gov.uk text and its explanatory note, Scotland is building a more centralised, more public and more judge-led system for dealing with senior police misconduct from 26 November 2026. It is still an internal conduct process rather than a criminal court, and plenty will depend on how the rules are used in real cases. But the direction is clear: faster decisions, clearer oversight and fewer closed doors. The Authority will also meet reasonable hearing expenses, although legal costs already covered by a private insurance policy will not be paid again.