Police officer identities withheld in over half of misconduct hearings held in South Yorkshire in 2025 so far

A total of five misconduct hearings have been held by the force this year, meaning that three out of five - or 60 per cent - of the officers involved in such proceedings have had their identities protected by South Yorkshire Police.

All five of the misconduct hearings have been open to the public, however.

Home Office statutory guidance on ‘Professional Standards, Performance and Integrity in Policing’ states that an advanced decision to hold a hearing in private should only be taken in ‘exceptional circumstances,’ and that the hearing’s chair may ‘consider that it would be appropriate to ask the appropriate authority to publish a notice on its website explaining the decision’.

It also states that ‘the welfare of the officer should also be considered, particularly where there may be a severe adverse effect on the officer’s health or there are dangers or threats to the officer that might arise from being named publicly’.

The Star asked South Yorkshire Police the following questions concerning the number of anonymised hearings being held by the force, and whether such decisions are condusive to an open and transparent police force.

- Is South Yorkshire Police still committed to transparency when it comes to misconduct hearings?

- Omitting names could be viewed by members of the public as South Yorkshire Police protecting their own. Is this the case? What steps are taken to ensure objectivity from those with responsibility around such decisions?

- When these decisions are made, what steps are taken? Is there a framework that must be adhered to, and if so, can this please be provided. What threshold has to be met for it to be deemed necessary to withhold an officer's name?

- Why is this decision taken on grounds such as mental health for some officers, but not others, when the prospect of such proceedings are likely to have an adverse impact on the mental health of most officers subject to such proceedings, and at risk of losing their job?

Get Sheffield’s biggest stories as they’re happening - sign up for the new breaking newsletter

This is the statement provided by the force, in response to the questions: “South Yorkshire Police recognises that transparency is key to building public trust and confidence, and integrity is a fundamental value in our approach to misconduct proceedings.

“As per the national regulations and guidance, the default position is for hearings to be open to the public in their entirety.

“However, there are cases in which officers/their legal representatives request privacy.

“The Chair of the proceedings considers these on a case by case basis. Decisions to provide a level of privacy are based on evidence that publication could affect the process or persons involved in proceedings.

“Considerations include (but are not limited to) the physical and mental health and/or welfare of the officer(s) subject to the hearing; and whether holding a hearing in public would jeopardise or interfere with any criminal proceedings.”

An application requesting an anonymised or private hearing has to be made to the hearing’s Chair from the individual officer, witness or complainant.

The hearing’s Chair can be either the Chief Constable or an independent legally qualified Chair.

Four of the five misconduct hearings held in 2025 were chaired by the force’s Chief Constable Lauren Poultney, and the other one was chaired by an independent legally qualified Chair

The Star understands that in some instances, particularly with cases involving domestic or sexual abuse, it is possible for an entire hearing to be anonymised to protect victims.

It is at the discretion of the Chair to approve or reject these applications.

All five of the officers subject to South Yorkshire Police misconduct hearings in 2025 have been male.