KEY POINTS:
The police hierarchy waged a ferocious behind-the-scenes battle against Dame Margaret Bazley's inquiry into police conduct.
Though her damning report extracted an unprecedented public apology from the country's top police officer, background material to the Commission of Inquiry into Police Conduct reveals that lawyers acting for the police challenged Dame Margaret on several counts during the three-year inquiry.
Among the incidents, police:
* Successfully opposed Dame Margaret's intention to survey people involved in supporting sexual assault victims.
* Raised concerns about the procedures adopted by the commission and asked it to undertake a "fundamental overhaul".
* Questioned the commission's reliance on disputed or unproven allegations when criticising police.
* Expressed concern that the commission was describing problems of a general nature in areas where the problem was confined to isolated cases.
In the behind-closed-doors legal battle, the Police Complaints Authority also questioned whether the commission had the jurisdiction to inquire into the authority and make recommendations relating to it.
Dame Margaret this week delivered a report that is being widely seen as a significant blow for police.
But she has said nothing of the obstacles placed in her path.
Sources yesterday told the Herald that the police took a particularly litigious approach to the inquiry.
But because Police Commissioner Howard Broad had been in the top job for only a year, he was being viewed as having a clean slate, unaffected by the previous wrangling.
Mr Broad said today the submissions made by the police lawyers were only to ensure the commission was conducted fairly.
"To characterise what our counsel said as somehow a ferocious fight to try and prevent the Commission proceeding would just be a real distortion of the truth," he told Radio Live.
"I know that my predecessor instructed us all -- and I was an assistant commissioner at the time -- that we would fully and completely support the commission.
"I know that we spent an inordinate amount of time, effort and our resource to find and produce the information on which the commission was going to base its inquiry."
Mr Broad said their lawyers challenge to a survey of sexual assault complainants was made because the method of collecting data could have been prejudicial to the police.
"I imagine our lawyers made submissions to ensure that what was done was a fair process," he said.
In late 2005 police lawyers lodged their opposition to a "survey" the commission intended to undertake.
The survey would have sought information from people involved in helping sexual assault complainants, and was intended to obtain assistance for the commission from organisations such as Rape Crisis Centres.
But police argued against it on the grounds that it was not a scientific survey, and that pursuing it at that stage of the inquiry would be prejudicial to the police.
Dame Margaret decided not to proceed with the survey.
It is clear from the report's appendices that Dame Margaret's draft report - circulated to parties of the inquiry in April last year - significantly disturbed the police.
The police legal team made a "particularly extensive and detailed" submission to the draft report, which required lengthy analysis to digest.
Police lawyers also claimed some criticisms of police were "unfair or inaccurate".
That included a proposed finding that the police's investigation of colleagues was sometimes inadequate.
Police yesterday said they could not respond to Herald questions about the information revealed in the report appendices.
A spokesman said he needed to consult police lawyers involved in the inquiry.
- with NZPA
