Police Commissioner Andrew Coster asked for review of code of conduct, saying sexual innuendo is ‘serious misconduct’

Police Commissioner Andrew Coster said sexual innuendo can be used to demean women in the workplace. Photo / Dean Purcell

The country’s top cop initiated a review of the police’s code of conduct amid concerns about how it treated the use of “sexual innuendo in the workplace”.

The review came after an officer was investigated following allegations he made “inappropriate, sexually explicit comments” to a colleague. The officer was found to have breached the code of conduct, and was “sanctioned”.

Documents released to the Herald under the Official Information Act reveal how the review was initiated.

On June 26, the Independent Police Conduct Authority (IPCA) released a summary of an investigation it oversaw into a complaint alleging an officer in Counties Manukau made “inappropriate, sexually explicit comments” to a colleague.

“Police investigated the allegations and found the officer’s behaviour breached the police code of conduct and he was sanctioned for his actions,” the IPCA said.

The IPCA agreed with the outcome of the police investigation and considered police took “appropriate employment action” against the officer.

On July 5, Police Commissioner Andrew Coster sent an email to the deputy chief executive of leadership and culture, including the director of integrity and conduct and acting deputy chief executive of public affairs.

In the email, titled “Code of conduct - threshold for serious misconduct”, Coster said a recent case had prompted him to “think about the way our code of conduct treats the use of offensive sexual innuendo in the workplace”.

Coster had spoken with the director of integrity and conduct and he had indicated that, generally, sexual innuendo would be misconduct, with serious misconduct being defined as “actual physical sexual misconduct”.

“With the standards of today and the way that sexual innuendo can be used to demean women in the workplace, I’m not sure that’s a sustainable position. I tend to the view that objectively offensive sexual innuendo should be regarded as serious misconduct,” Coster said.

“Changing this setting would also create fresh opportunity to signal again our expectations around the way we treat each other in the workplace.”

Coster asked whether it was open to police to make the change and for any advice.

“Given media interest in the current case, my intention would be to signal publicly that I have sought advice on this question (unless you have an early view that such a change is not viable from an employment law perspective).”

On July 24, a notice was published on the police’s internal communication, Ten One, notifying staff that a review of the code of conduct was under way.

The review would consider how “offensive sexually explicit or suggestive language” sat as misconduct and serious misconduct.

“Clarifying this setting would signal more strongly our expectations about the way we treat each other in the workplace.”

The notice said the code would be “clarified” to ensure “sexual misconduct includes sexual harassment (including offensive sexual language)”.

“We are committed to providing a safe work environment that enables everyone to thrive, including employees, contractors, or external partners working in our premises.”

On Wednesday, a police spokeswoman told the Herald the review began in mid-July and was continuing.

“The purpose of the review is to consider if the Code of Conduct reflects clarity that sexual misconduct, including of a verbal and/or discriminatory nature, is serious misconduct if found to have occurred,” she said.

“The review will consider necessary changes to the Code of Conduct and propose any amendments to the Executive Leadership Team.”

Sam Sherwood is a Christchurch-based reporter who covers crime. He is a senior journalist who joined the Herald in 2022, and has worked as a journalist for 10 years.