Australian Federal Police: AFP Investigations Doctrine - Criminal Investigations Guide, Lecture notes of Decision Making

Download Australian Federal Police: AFP Investigations Doctrine - Criminal Investigations Guide and more Lecture notes Decision Making in PDF only on Docsity! : AUSTRALIAN FEDERAL POLICE Australian Federal Police Investigations Doctrine ii UNCLASSIFIED UNCLASSIFIED AFP Investigations D octrine Contents Contents Foreword 1 01 Introduction 3 02 The AFP’s Operating Environment 5 03 AFP Investigations 9 04 Conduct of an Investigation 13 Critical Thinking in Investigation Planning 15 Planning Considerations 15 Phases and Milestones 16 Operations support 16 Legal aspects 16 Asset Confiscation 17 Media 17 Planning throughout an investigation 17 Avenues of Inquiry 18 Investigative Interviewing 18 Adherence to the Legal Framework 18 Admissibility of evidence 19 Investigative Records and Accountability 19 Decision to Finalise an Investigation 20 Actions on Finalisation of an Investigation 21 05 Decision Making and Risk Management AFP Investigations 23 06 Investigations Management 27 Governance by Existing Functional Reporting Lines 27 Governance for Joint Investigations 28 Senior Investigating Officer 31 Coordinator/Superintendent 33 Team Leader/Sergeant 33 Case Officer 34 Information Coordinator 34 Interview Coordinator 34 Disclosure Coordinator 35 Intelligence Coordinator 35 High Tech Crime Operations (HTCO) Coordinator 35 Forensic Coordinator 35 Evidence and Exhibits Coordinator 35 THIS DOCUMENTS HAS BEEN DE-CLASSIFIED AND PUBLISHED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT 1982 (COMMONWEALTH) INFORMATION PUBLICATION SCHEME (IPS) THIS DOCUMENTS HAS BEEN DE-CLASSIFIED AND PUBLISHED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT 1982 (COMMONWEALTH) INFORMATION PUBLICATION SCHEME (IPS) AFP Investigations D octrine Chapter 01 Introduction 3 UNCLASSIFIED UNCLASSIFIED 01 Introduction Purpose of Doctrine Doctrine provides philosophical and procedural guidance on the way an organisation plans, resources and conducts business. Doctrine is authoritative but requires judgement in its application. It is derived from a mixture of observation, applied thought and experiential learning. Doctrine should be adapted within the principles, legislation, governance and professional standards to suit each operational situation. Intent of Investigations Doctrine The intent of the Australian Federal Police Investigations Doctrine is to provide authoritative guidance that defines and develops the principles that drive the investigative culture and capability of the Australian Federal Police (AFP) at the individual, functional and organisational level. Doctrine is not a rigid compliance document in its own right. It should reflect AFP Core Values and be read in conjunction with governance such as Commissioner’s Orders, National Guidelines and Practical Guides, which provide investigators with a framework to conduct investigations. This doctrine reflects standardised language and concepts used by the AFP in the conduct of investigations. Scope of Document This document is applicable to all AFP personnel conducting or participating in investigations. It provides an overview of: • the operational context in which AFP conducts investigations • what constitutes an investigation for the AFP • the stages in the conduct of an AFP investigation • decision making and risk management in AFP investigations • how AFP investigations are managed. Detailed descriptions of specific investigative processes or techniques or of the conduct of investigations in different contexts are detailed in relevant Commissioner’s Orders, National Guidelines, Practical Guides and Aide-Memoires. They are out of scope of this publication. This document is principally intended for all investigators across the AFP. This is an unclassified public document and is disclosable in judicial proceedings. Document Maintenance The owner of the Investigations Doctrine is Deputy Commissioner Operations THIS DOCUMENTS HAS BEEN DE-CLASSIFIED AND PUBLISHED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT 1982 (COMMONWEALTH) INFORMATION PUBLICATION SCHEME (IPS) UNCLASSIFIED Version Date Intent Authorised by Reference 11 Jun 2013 Publication of the AFP AFP Commissioner Investigations Doctrine Investigations Doctrine. Foreword 1.2 Sep 2020 The term referral on pages 13 and | Manager Investigation and CMS2020/3944 14 changed to report” to align with the Lawler Review implementation. Minor amendments to language on page 14 to align the body of the text with the Model of an Investigation on page 13. Operational Learning UNCLASSIFIED AFP Investigations D octrine Chapter 02 The AFP’s O perating Environm ent 7 UNCLASSIFIED UNCLASSIFIED Partnerships Partnerships are key to the AFP’s success in achieving operational outcomes. Strong partnerships and a collaborative approach best enable the AFP to meet its role ‘to enforce Commonwealth criminal law, to contribute to combating organised crime and to protect Commonwealth and national interests from criminal activity in Australia and overseas3’. The AFP is the Commonwealth’s chief source of advice on policing issues. To be successful, it is critical for the AFP to work collaboratively with the community, and with State, Territory, Commonwealth and/or international partners. Partnerships bring capabilities, authority, expertise, capacity and operational reach that may not be achievable within the AFP’s own resources. Collaboration allows for a multijurisdictional, multidisciplinary approach to crime, applying a range of policing and administrative powers, public and private sector capacities to resolve shared criminal and public security issues. Critical partners that the AFP works collaboratively with include: • Community. The ability of the AFP to function effectively is dependent upon public support, contributions and assistance. • Law enforcement including domestic, national and international agencies. As well as sharing a common professional culture, working with other policing agencies enhances the capability to deal with criminal issues of mutual concern. This cooperation may be through joint operations, support to partner agencies, liaison and/ or information sharing. • Criminal justice system, including prosecutors, the judiciary and corrections. These elements share a common interest in upholding the law and the AFP initiates judicial action through this system. • The AFP is a key partner in the national security community. It maintains relationships with other agencies such as Defence, Customs and Border Protection, the Department of Immigration and Citizenship and the Australian Intelligence Community. The AFP’s ability to investigate criminal activity is an essential component of an effective whole-of-government approach to national security issues. The AFP also benefits from these relationships in terms of access to a wider range of information sources and capabilities. • The AFP also partners with other government departments at the Commonwealth, State and Territory levels. Each party possess skills, information and specialist capabilities that can contribute to success. • Domestically and internationally, the AFP engages with private sector and non-governmental organisations to assist in the proactive pursuit of law enforcement, capacity development and public security initiatives. In some cases the relationship will be enshrined in memoranda of understanding, inter-governmental agreements, international treaties or other agreements that set expectations on AFP’s involvement in various issues or activities. Furthermore, where consistent with AFP objectives and priorities, the imperatives of collaboration may shape priorities that are not articulated in government direction or by the legal framework. 3 AFP Strategic Plan 2012-2015 THIS DOCUMENTS HAS BEEN DE-CLASSIFIED AND PUBLISHED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT 1982 (COMMONWEALTH) INFORMATION PUBLICATION SCHEME (IPS) AFP Investigations D octrine Chapter 02 The AFP’s O perating Environm ent 8 UNCLASSIFIED UNCLASSIFIED Operating Contexts The AFP routinely operates in a range of different jurisdictional contexts. AFP investigators should understand the implications of, and work effectively across, each context. • ACT. ACT Policing is responsible for providing quality policing services to the people of the ACT. This responsibility requires ACT Policing to maintain a similar breadth of partnerships as those required in the national context. • National. The AFP enforces Commonwealth criminal law across all Australian jurisdictions and works collaboratively with partners to address public safety, serious crime, organised crime and other national security priorities. • International. International partnerships provide the ability for the AFP to protect Australian interests by fighting crime offshore. As Australia’s national police service, the AFP represents all Australian law enforcement agencies internationally. The AFP conducts, leads and participates in joint investigations of crimes committed in international jurisdictions where consistent with the legal framework. The AFP: coordinates complex international investigations; cooperates with partners to combat transnational crime (including terrorism); significantly contributes to peacekeeping missions; supports international police capacity development; contributes to international disaster relief; and provides close personal protection for Australian dignitaries travelling abroad. • Australia’s External Territories. The AFP provides policing services in Australia’s External Territories. Given the close proximity of some territories to foreign nations, policing in this context will often include a prominent international dimension. THIS DOCUMENTS HAS BEEN DE-CLASSIFIED AND PUBLISHED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT 1982 (COMMONWEALTH) INFORMATION PUBLICATION SCHEME (IPS) AFP Investigations D octrine Chapter 03 AFP Investigations 9 UNCLASSIFIED UNCLASSIFIED “The police seek and preserve public favour, not by catering to public opinion, but by constantly demonstrating absolutely impartial service...” Sir Robert Peel’s Principles of Policing Definition Investigations are an objective search for the truth by the discovery and presentation of evidence in an exhaustive, comprehensive and organised manner. This is reflected in the 2011 Australian Government Investigations Standards, which defines an investigation as: “... a process of seeking information relevant to an alleged, apparent or potential breach of the law, involving possible judicial proceedings4. The primary purpose of an investigation is to gather admissible evidence for any subsequent action, whether under criminal, civil penalty, civil, disciplinary or administrative sanctions. Investigations can also result in prevention and/or disruption action. The term investigation can also include intelligence processes which directly support the gathering of admissible evidence.” AFP investigations provide a service to the Australian community by having a positive impact on crime, national security and the public interest. In conducting an investigation, the AFP investigator applies professional investigative expertise in accordance with relevant legislation and the AFP’s Core Values, Strategic Plan and governance. Investigative Mindset A good investigator is committed, naturally inquisitive and continually engages in personal and organisational learning. They apply critical thinking and innovation in the development of investigative strategies that are adaptable in application. A good investigator is a responsible leader and an excellent communicator who always asks questions while being respectful of all. They identify and utilise all available resources including specialist expertise. A good investigator is tenacious, collaborative, courageous and unrelenting in the search for the truth without being inflexible. They are always current with relevant laws, governance and investigative techniques. A good investigator is a calculated risk-taker who is accountable for their actions and whose decisions are reasonable, proportionate and necessary. The Investigative Mindset embodies the AFP Core Values and is consistent with the ethos of the wider policing profession. It highlights the particular attributes, knowledge and cognitive skills relevant to the investigative craft. 4 This includes judicial inquests and Government-appointed committees of inquiry. 03 AFP Investigations THIS DOCUMENTS HAS BEEN DE-CLASSIFIED AND PUBLISHED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT 1982 (COMMONWEALTH) INFORMATION PUBLICATION SCHEME (IPS) AFP Investigations D octrine Chapter 03 AFP Investigations 12 UNCLASSIFIED UNCLASSIFIED Relationship between Intelligence and Investigations Intelligence is a product derived from adding value to information to provide insight and influence decision making. Intelligence gathering and processing and investigations are closely related activities. Developing a culture for effective information-sharing and collaboration will result in a mutually-supporting relationship between intelligence and investigations. Key elements of this relationship are as follows: • Intelligence-led initiations provide a primary means of commencing an investigation of an individual, group, network or a type of criminal activity. • During an investigation, intelligence staff may work closely with investigators by adding value to tactical information and providing guidance to team decision making. • An investigation is in itself a process of collecting information on criminal activity. This may constitute a body of information in its own right or may contribute to the sum of criminal intelligence data available to the AFP and its intelligence partners. At the conclusion of an investigation, any intelligence dividend from the investigation should be fed back into the criminal intelligence system. Where it does not compromise the investigation, an information source or the chances of prosecutorial success, investigators should take every opportunity to share investigation information with the intelligence system. THIS DOCUMENTS HAS BEEN DE-CLASSIFIED AND PUBLISHED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT 1982 (COMMONWEALTH) INFORMATION PUBLICATION SCHEME (IPS) UNCLASSIFIED 04 Conduct of an Investigation “The conduct of outstanding investigations remains a key pillar in the success of the AFP and the reinvigoration of investigations has been a continued focus for me as Commissioner. Investigators provide leadership in the workplace through their high level skills, competence and confidence in undertaking investigations.” AFP Commissioner Tony Negus An investigation should be understood as a part of the continuum of AFP operations in accordance with its law enforcement, protective and national security responsibilities. Given the complexity of criminal and security issues, an investigation is rarely an end in its own right. It may link to previous, ongoing and subsequent AFP. investigations. An investigation may be influenced by or influence other investigations by the AFP and partner agencies. The way an investigation progresses will depend on a number of factors including the specific circumstances, the dimensions of the investigation and the decisions made in the course of the investigation. However, at a fundamental level, investigations will generally conform to the model illustrated in Figure 4-1. This includes the stages of initiation, evaluation, planning, investigative activity, outcome and finalisation. The model should not be taken as an inflexible template for an investigation. Investigators will always retain the discretion to organise their investigation however necessary to achieve the most suitable outcome. Figure 4-1: Model of an Investigation This model is not linear. It recognises that although investigations will conform to this general approach, they may follow different paths. There will be the potential| neéd'to Stép back to previous stages (possibly numerous times) before an investigation can be finalised. In some cases, an investigation may be finalised before an outcome is achieved. It also illustrates the constant need to review the investigation throughout all stages. UNCLASSIFIED uoneBysaau| ue Jo JyNpUoD pO sa}deYD auLyd0Q suoNeBNSaAu| dV AFP Investigations D octrine Chapter 04 Conduct of an Investigation 14 UNCLASSIFIED UNCLASSIFIED Initiation Initiation is the process by which a matter is brought to the AFP for consideration for investigation. There are a number of paths by which the investigation may be initiated. These are not necessarily mutually exclusive. • Response. Includes a broad range of AFP operational activities, such as AFP deployment to an incident5, AFP protection operations, or response to criminal activity that has been reported from the community, police patrol activities or other sources. • Report. When a matter is reported by a member of the public, a Minister or Member of Parliament, or partner agency to the AFP, it becomes an investigation. A report can be received at the international, national, or jurisdictional level. • Intelligence-led. These are where the intelligence system (including intelligence interaction with other agencies) informs AFP investigations. Intelligence should provide a primary mechanism for initiating investigations. • Other Investigations. One investigation will often initiate another. Further criminal matters may be identified during any stage of an investigation (evaluation, planning, investigation, outcome or finalisation). These matters may need to be evaluated for subsequent investigation. In some cases, this may result in widening the scope or initiating a new stage of an existing investigation. In other cases, a separate investigation may need to be considered. Evaluation An evaluation is a process of determining whether the AFP will continue to investigate a matter and assigning it a priority. The evaluation includes major decisions taken by AFP. It will determine if the AFP will: • continue to investigate • refer the matter to a partner agency and, if so, whether AFP will collaborate in a joint investigation • record it as a criminal matter without further investigation (due to the level of criminality, allocation of resources to higher priority matters, likelihood of successful prosecution and/or not in the public interest) • reject the matter. When the decision involves no further investigation by the AFP, the matter moves directly to the finalisation stage. The AFP considers all matters cognisant of the operating environment. Factors that influence the evaluation process include the AFP’s prioritisation model, public interest, available resources, existing inter-agency agreements and an assessment of appropriate investigative strategies. Consideration at this stage should also include what investigative strategy may yield the optimal outcome with respect to the impact, cost and time balance. 5 Incident – an event requiring police response and includes emergency, planned and unplanned operations and other events. An incident covers anything from a vehicle accident to a multijurisdictional bushfire, which may comprise mult ple incidents (ANZPAA – A Common Approach to Incident Management: ICCS Plus) THIS DOCUMENTS HAS BEEN DE-CLASSIFIED AND PUBLISHED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT 1982 (COMMONWEALTH) INFORMATION PUBLICATION SCHEME (IPS) AFP Investigations D octrine Chapter 04 Conduct of an Investigation 17 UNCLASSIFIED UNCLASSIFIED Investigators should seek specific legal advice from prosecutors or AFP Legal where appropriate and available. In all dealings with lawyers, the investigator needs to be cognisant of the impact of Legal Professional Privilege; where and how it applies and how and when it will need to be protected. Asset Confiscation ‘Following the money’ and identifying opportunities for asset confiscation is a highly effective investigative strategy in removing the proceeds of crime and preventing re-investment into further criminal activity. Media The use of the media must be carefully considered as it represents both a risk and an opportunity for an investigation. It can aid an investigation by both disseminating information to, and eliciting information from, the public. However, it may also inadvertently compromise an investigation or methodology. Any investigative activity must comply with standing AFP governance regarding media. AFP media support personnel may provide direct advice or support to investigations. Planning throughout an investigation Planning is not a discrete activity that is only conducted at the beginning of an investigation, it is a continuous process. Investigators should constantly be alert for the need to review, particularly (but not exclusively) when milestones are reached. Investigators should regularly review the investigative and supporting strategies to ensure that their assumptions and basic approach remains valid and appropriate. Where this is not the case, the Investigation Plan should be changed or the investigation re-evaluated. Investigative Activity This stage is the actual conduct of investigative activity to determine the facts related to the case. The organising logic of this stage should be based on the gathering of admissible evidence against each of the physical elements and fault elements of a criminal offence. For a person to be convicted of an offence, all physical and fault elements of that offence must be proven beyond reasonable doubt. Investigators have a responsibility to search objectively for the truth of the case. They should engage in critical thinking and explore possible sources of inculpatory and exculpatory evidence to challenge the strength of any investigative hypotheses. Inculpatory evidence shows, or tends to show, a person’s involvement in an act or omission. Exculpatory evidence is favourable to a suspect or defendant. This process makes the investigation more robust and improves the chances of success in any judicial proceedings. Investigative activity should be sensitive to the possible need to change the scope of the investigation as it may become apparent that different offences are more applicable. This may have implications for the structure of future investigative activity and its associated risks Investigative activity should link to an objective that is achievable, in accordance with the AFP’s priorities and consistent with the investment of time and resources committed to the investigation. As discussed in planning, this stage may consist of several phases each with objectives and m lestones contributing to the investigative outcome. Avenues of Inquiry Avenues of inquiry are the sources of information from which investigators seek to derive admissible evidence. There is no single, comprehensive set of avenues of inquiry that will be applicable in all investigations. Each investigation will need to be considered on its own merits to determine and sequence the appropriate avenues of inquiry that may lead to the preferred outcome(s). THIS DOCUMENTS HAS BEEN DE-CLASSIFIED AND PUBLISHED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT 1982 (COMMONWEALTH) INFORMATION PUBLICATION SCHEME (IPS) AFP Investigations D octrine Chapter 04 Conduct of an Investigation 18 UNCLASSIFIED UNCLASSIFIED Investigative activity is an exhaustive pursuit of relevant inculpatory and exculpatory evidence related to the physical and fault elements of criminal offences. A single avenue of inquiry will rarely yield all of the evidence necessary to prove each element. Hence the investigation should explore all available lines of inquiry in order to establish the truth of the case beyond a narrow focus on the elements necessary to prove the offence. Over time, sources of information available to investigators may change as legislation, technology and other factors evolve. AFP investigators need to remain innovative in the identification and use of avenues of inquiry and abreast of all new technologies, relevant legislation, policy and governance. Investigative Interviewing Interviewing is a key investigative skill; it is a skill that is not innate but must be learned. Interviews provide investigators with an excellent opportunity to obtain actionable information from members of the public, suspects, victims, human sources and witnesses. The gathering of information from a well-prepared interview of a victim or witness will contribute significantly to the investigation. An effective interview of a suspect can commit that suspect to an account of events that may include an admission or a false denial. In making an admission, the suspect may detail how the offence was committed and thus the investigation can be more focused. A properly obtained admission may prove the fault elements of the offence beyond reasonable doubt. The cornerstone of all effective interviews is planning. This is a strategy for lawfully eliciting an accurate and reliable account in relation to a matter under investigation. Interview plans can be completed very quickly or in depth, depending on the circumstances. However to ensure its admissibility as evidence, the manner in which this information is elicited must always be fair, ethical and in accordance with legislation, the rules of evidence and organisational procedures. During the interview planning process, it is imperative for the investigator to develop a detailed knowledge of the matter being investigated and the context within which the interviewee features. This includes an understanding of the culture and nature of the interviewee; this assists the investigator to build rapport. By remaining open minded, employing active listening techniques and undertaking behavioural and action analysis, the good investigator is able to work flexibly within their interview plan to ask the right questions at the right time. This has a positive impact on the quality and quantity of information that may be elicited, and allows the investigator to thoroughly probe all available avenues of inquiry. Adherence to the Legal Framework Investigations must be conducted in a manner that is consistent with the legal framework. This is particularly relevant with regard to the collection, handling and presentation of evidence and the application of police powers. This means that the investigator should be conversant with implications of relevant law on their ability to collect evidence and conduct the nvestigation. AFP governance may also have implications for the conduct of investigations. THIS DOCUMENTS HAS BEEN DE-CLASSIFIED AND PUBLISHED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT 1982 (COMMONWEALTH) INFORMATION PUBLICATION SCHEME (IPS) AFP Investigations D octrine Chapter 04 Conduct of an Investigation 19 UNCLASSIFIED UNCLASSIFIED Admissibility of evidence To be admissible, evidence must be relevant, reliable and obtained lawfully and fairly. Disclosure Appropriate and informed disclosure requires the provision to the accused prior to trial of a brief detailing the prosecution’s case against the accused. It includes any information in relation to the credibility or reliability of the prosecution witnesses and material which the prosecution does not intend to rely on as part of its case which either runs counter to the prosecution case or might reasonably be expected to assist the defendant in advancing a defence. Some material (usually involving potential compromise of intelligence capabilities, sensitive investigative sources or techniques or other adverse impact on public interest or security) can be exempted from disclosure but this will need to be in accordance with the law, policies and AFP direction. The implications of disclosure should be recognised in the initial investigation planning. All information relevant to the investigation needs to be recorded and handled in accordance with the potential need for disclosure. Before disclosing any material obtained from an ACC hearing, AFP Legal should be consulted. Investigative Records and Accountability The maintenance and management of complete and accurate investigative records is of fundamental importance. Decisions made, actions taken and information uncovered should be recorded in detail while the information is still contemporary. Accurate and well-managed records can directly facilitate the conduct and outcome of the investigation. This is particularly important in a complex, large or long-term investigation. During the conduct of an investigation, the ability to store, analyse and retrieve collected information in a timely fashion can help track progress toward objectives and identify new avenues of inquiry. At the outcome stage, this will facilitate the compilation of a brief of evidence which may be necessary for a prosecution or inquiry or to obtain any warrants necessary for certain prevention or disruption activities. Investigators should use the most effective and efficient information management system or tools consistent with dimensions of the investigation. Any information management system used needs to be able to record information and identify sources, credibility and any assessment of its truth and relevance. Effective information management is also required for accountability and transparency of the investigation. This facilitates disclosure to a defendant and assists the identification and categorisation of non-disclosable material. Records should also be maintained to document decisions made during the investigation and the context and reason for these decisions. Such records will be particularly important in the conduct of internal or external reviews. They also facilitate the consistent and efficient handling of subpoena and Freedom of Information (FOI) requests. Accurate and comprehensive records also contribute to the sharing of investigative information. This can feed into AFP reporting against performance measures and provide information for data centres or intelligence reports. Finally, if a concluded investigation can be re-opened in the future, the investigative records will be the starting point for the new investigation. THIS DOCUMENTS HAS BEEN DE-CLASSIFIED AND PUBLISHED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT 1982 (COMMONWEALTH) INFORMATION PUBLICATION SCHEME (IPS) AFP Investigations D octrine Chapter 04 Conduct of an Investigation 22 UNCLASSIFIED UNCLASSIFIED Scope of a Review The scope of a review may vary and can focus on single or multiple issues. These can include (but are not limited to) the overall conduct or continuation of an investigation, past and potential investigative strategies, appropriate risk mitigation and re-assessment of the balance between the impact, cost and time of an investigation. Contributing to Organisational Learning The AFP should take every opportunity to learn from its previous experience and drive continuous improvement. All stages of an investigation provide learning opportunities which need to be recorded and consolidated. The knowledge gained should inform the periodic reviews and updates of important governance, best practice advice and training material. Subsequent Action An investigation is not an end in itself. Wherever possible, it should contribute to assisting the wider aims and objectives of the AFP and partners. Throughout all stages of an investigation, investigators should be alert for the potential to contribute to other priorities of the AFP or partners. This may include: • Intelligence sharing. Information and intelligence should be shared, noting any limitations arising from legislative, judicial, evidentiary or governance regimes. As part of the finalisation process, investigators should ensure that all relevant information and intelligence is appropriately recorded. In some cases, the finalisation of an investigation may initiate a major intelligence project. • Further AFP investigations. All investigations, but particularly investigations of serious crime and organised crime, have the potential to uncover information that may warrant the initiation of another AFP investigation. • Referrals to partners. AFP investigations may also uncover information and intelligence relevant to partners. This information may not be limited to criminal proceedings, but can also be relevant to civil or administrative proceedings. THIS DOCUMENTS HAS BEEN DE-CLASSIFIED AND PUBLISHED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT 1982 (COMMONWEALTH) INFORMATION PUBLICATION SCHEME (IPS) AFP Investigations D octrine Chapter 05 D ecision M aking and Risk M anagem ent AFP Investigations 23 UNCLASSIFIED UNCLASSIFIED That I will faithfully and diligently exercise and perform all my powers and duties as a person declared to be a member under section 40B of the Act of the Australian Federal Police without fear or favour, affection or ill will, from this date until I cease to be... a member ...of the Australian Federal Police. From the AFP Oath (AFP Regulations 1979) Investigative Decision Making A decision is a choice between a variety of alternatives and a decision maker is whoever makes such a choice. A decision can be made instantly but more often involves the decision maker in a process of identification, analysis, assessment, choice and planning6. As Constables of the law, all sworn AFP investigators are independently responsible for exercis[ing] and perform[ing] all...powers and duties...without fear or favour, affection or ill will.7 This means that, although the investigator may be working as a part of a team, each will be empowered to exercise their own discretion in applying the law. Using discretion is making a decision. This highlights the importance of all investigators being independently able to consistently apply critical thinking in the course of their duties across all stages of an investigation. This empowerment should be cultivated, encouraged and supported by AFP leadership. Decisions are made in situations of uncertainty. As an investigation always involves uncertainty, it is a decision- making process. Decisions have to be made at all levels in an investigation (strategic and field) when points are reached where there is a choice of options. Decision making in an investigation is often a very complex process undertaken in difficult and time critical circumstances, yet is open to internal and external review and challenge. The AFP, its management and individual investigators are responsible to the community, to government and to the law for the quality of investigative decisions, and should always be seeking to learn from past successful and unsuccessful decisions. The reason a decision is made is in order to most safely, effectively and efficiently achieve a desired outcome(s) in accordance with law, AFP Core Values and governance. Making good decisions is about calculated risk taking. A decision should be judged on the quality of the decision-making, not on the outcome. An investigator should demonstrate that they acted objectively, reasonably and fairly in the circumstances. As such, it is crucial that investigators document their decisions contemporaneously. Attributes of a Good Investigative Decision Maker To make good and justifiable decisions, investigators should constantly apply the attributes described in the Investigative Mindset (which incorporate the AFP Core Values). In particular they should seek to recognise and mitigate the influences of personal and cultural bias (described in Chapter 3). Components of Good Investigative Decision-Making There are numerous models for decision making8. These vary in specific construct, but all include similar component stages which should to be undertaken to achieve the best investigative decisions and subsequent outcomes. 6 Heller R (1998) Making Decisions, Dorling Kindersley 7 AFP Oath of Service 8 These include the United Kingdom Association of Chiefs of Police National Decision Model; and the AFP Ethical Decision Making Model 05 Decision Making and Risk Management AFP Investigations THIS DOCUMENTS HAS BEEN DE-CLASSIFIED AND PUBLISHED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT 1982 (COMMONWEALTH) INFORMATION PUBLICATION SCHEME (IPS) AFP Investigations D octrine Chapter 05 D ecision M aking and Risk M anagem ent AFP Investigations 24 UNCLASSIFIED UNCLASSIFIED Defining the Situation. This is the identification of the existing circumstances and the particular problems, threats, risks and/or opportunities. This is undertaken via the gathering of all available relevant information (including evidence and intelligence). This is particularly important as it defines the circumstances under which the decision was made, the information available to the decision maker at the time and the rationale for the decision. Choice. This is an assessment and ranking of the various options in terms of their potential positive outcomes balanced against their risks. The option with the minimal risk is not necessarily the best, as good investigators will take calculated risks to create an opportunity to achieve the best outcomes. Often a combination of options may achieve the most positive outcomes. Justification. As investigative decisions are open to challenge and/or review, they must always be recorded and be justifiable (reasonable, necessary, fair and proportionate). Action and Review. Once the chosen option has been actioned, in line with the Investigative Mindset, good investigators should constantly be questioning, assessing and reviewing their actions and decisions, learning from them and changing them where necessary. Recording decisions. In some cases, legislation, governance or standard operating procedures will determine the requirement for specific types of decision to be documented and when and how they are to be recorded. However, this is often left to the investigator’s discretion and judgement. The context, rationale and explanation for a particular decision may need to be included in any record. The record should be proportionate to the seriousness of the situation or incident, particularly if it involves a risk to community safety or the safety of AFP employees. Communicating the decision. Communication is a critical component of decision making. Team colleagues, management and partners need to be informed of key decisions in a timely fashion. Complainants and the victims of crime similarly need to be kept advised of progress of an investigation. Such communication will help assuage any concerns or anxiety on the part of victims of crime, and will help establish team trust and collaboration. In some jurisdictions there may also be legislative requirements to keep victims advised of certain stages of prosecutions. Risks in Investigations When managed correctly, risk can have a positive impact on the AFP’s ability to achieve objectives or goals. Risk assessments inform the decision making process and assists in determining the best options to achieve success. Calculated risk management is where deliberate decisions are made in balancing the nature and magnitude of the risk against the value of the potential outcome. Risk is inherent in all investigations. Calculated risk management is an essential part of the Investigative Mindset. In taking calculated risks, good investigators apply their judgement, experience and professionalism to make decisions that are justifiable and will withstand scrutiny. Risks in the conduct of the investigation The following risk types will influence decisions in all investigations. The level of risk retained and managed should be commensurate with the priority of the task and its contribution to achieving a successful outcome. • Risk to community safety. This risk can emanate from the criminal activity itself but also from the actions (or inactions) of AFP investigators. • Risk to the security and safety of AFP employees. AFP investigators often need to operate in high risk environments and conduct high risk activities. The AFP holds the safety and well-being of its appointees as a priority. THIS DOCUMENTS HAS BEEN DE-CLASSIFIED AND PUBLISHED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT 1982 (COMMONWEALTH) INFORMATION PUBLICATION SCHEME (IPS) AFP Investigations D octrine Chapter 06 Investigations M anagem ent 27 UNCLASSIFIED UNCLASSIFIED Investigations management refers to the management arrangements in place to ensure that the investigation is conducted to the appropriate standards, reflecting the AFP Core Values. The investigation management structure provides the decision making framework of the investigation. It needs to be designed in a manner that allows decisions to be made at the appropriate levels commensurate with the priority and dimensions of the investigation and any subordinate tasks. Similar management arrangements are replicated in joint investigations that the AFP conducts with partners. Effective management structures are also a primary requirement for ensuring that risks are identified, considered and dealt with appropriately. Governance of AFP Investigations All investigations will have governance arrangements that provide the management and coordination link between the investigation, the wider AFP and partners. Fundamentally, the governance arrangements bring an investigation into existence (at the Evaluation Stage) and provide direction and strategic oversight. The other responsibilities that need to be effected by the governance structures are: • appointment of an investigator or formation of the investigative team, including appointment of a Senior Investigating Officer (if required, see below) and/or Case Officer • issuing, maintenance and/or amendment of the terms of reference (if required) • allocation of an operation name (required for any major or joint investigation) • prioritising the investigation • elevation or delegation of investigative oversight/management in accordance with dimensions of the investigation and any apparent changes to the dimensions • allocation of resources and support to the investigation • coordination of investigation activities with other AFP or partner agency activities • initiation and coordination of internal reviews • management of information to government and the public. There are two general models by which governance can be provided for an investigation. In some cases, governance oversight by the existing functional reporting lines is appropriate. In other cases, an investigation may require a joint agency approach The determinants fo the design of governance structures will be the dimensions of the investigation: risk, complexity, scale and time. Governance by Existing Functional Reporting Lines Unless alternative arrangements are particularly required (due to the dimensions of the investigation or if a joint agency structure is otherwise necessary), AFP investigations will usually be governed in accordance with the existing Functional Reporting Lines. Hence, these types of investigation do not require reorganisation. Decision- making and reporting relevant to the investigation will continue to be provided through the usual chain of command of Team Leader/Sergeant, Coordinator/Superintendent and Manager/Commander. 06 Investigations Management THIS DOCUMENTS HAS BEEN DE-CLASSIFIED AND PUBLISHED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT 1982 (COMMONWEALTH) INFORMATION PUBLICATION SCHEME (IPS) AFP Investigations D octrine Chapter 06 Investigations M anagem ent 28 UNCLASSIFIED UNCLASSIFIED This type of governance arrangement is scalable. As required by the complexity or risk involved in the investigation, more senior officials (such as the relevant Team Leader, Coordinator, Manager or even National Manager) may retain more direct oversight, decision-making or even direct involvement. This may include the establishment of a strategic oversight committee comprising of Executive members, including members of Operation Support functions. In these cases, additional or specialist resources can be provided in support of the team responsible for the investigation without creating a separate structure. Governance for Joint Investigations The alternative governance model is to establish a joint organisational entity specifically for managing an investigation. This may also be appropriate for managing a series of related investigations and can involve enacting an existing agreement involving multiple agencies. Joint Management Group. A senior committee (usually called a Joint Management Group or JMG) will set the strategic agenda and maintain strategic oversight of the investigations team. The JMG may include senior representatives of all agencies involved in the investigation. The AFP will usually be represented in a JMG at the Assistant Commissioner level or a delegate. In some situations, the JMG may be a standing committee that oversees several investigations. The JMG is responsible for critical strategic decisions such as the appointment of a Senior Investigating Officer (SIO) and developing, issuing and amending any terms of reference. The existence of the JMG does not override each member’s responsibility to their agency line of command and the existence of each party’s executive command and control. Operational Coordination Group. An Operational Coordination Group or OCG (or similar entity under a different name) is a subordinate committee that exists to deconflict the targets and resources of the investigation with the activities of the agencies involved. The AFP will normally be represented on an OCG at the Superintendent/Coordinator level. AFP Governance in Joint Agency Investigations. The operational direction for the investigation may primarily come through joint management arrangements (the JMG and OCG, etc.). The AFP’s involvement in these committees provides the link to the AFP governance system. This allows the AFP to: • oversee AFP participation in the investigation and determine the continuing need for (or expansion or reduction of) AFP participation • issue specific tasks to AFP members of the investigation team • place any limitations on AFP involvement • receive and disseminate investigative reporting • maintain the relationship with other agencies involved in the investigation. Incident Command and Control System. The joint agency approach is also applicable to an incident response that includes an investigative component. This will usually be organised in accordance with the Incident Command and Control System (ICCS) or ICCS Plus approach9. In these circumstances, the investigation is one of the functions within the incident management structure. It will report to and receive direction from the Command and Control function. 9 ICCS is a structure devised and used by the Australia-New Zealand Counter-Terrorism Committee (ANZCTC) for management of terrorism incidents. ICCS Plus is variation on ICCS developed by the Australia New Zealand Policing Advisory Agency (ANZPAA) for the management of incidents requiring multi-agency and/or multijurisdictional responses. THIS DOCUMENTS HAS BEEN DE-CLASSIFIED AND PUBLISHED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT 1982 (COMMONWEALTH) INFORMATION PUBLICATION SCHEME (IPS) AFP Investigations D octrine Chapter 06 Investigations M anagem ent 29 UNCLASSIFIED UNCLASSIFIED Operations Support The AFP and partner agencies have a range of operations support capabilities (such as intelligence, forensics and surveillance) available to help deal with the complexity and sophistication of criminal activity. These are valuable and finite assets that should be managed efficiently and not overtasked or underutilised. Operations support capability owners should be consulted early during the planning stage to determine how each can be used for best effect. There are two general models for providing operations support to investigations: • Consultancy. This is where control of an asset is retained by the responsible AFP functional area. The asset does not work directly within the investigative team; rather the investigators can request support for specific tasks, with support allocated as per usual procedures in accordance with the priority of the investigation. • Integrated. This is where an operational support asset is assigned to work as a part of the investigative team. For the period of the assignment and subject to any specified limitations, the asset will be tasked in accordance with the priorities of the investigative leadership. These two models are represented graphically in Fig 6-1. Fig 6-1. Consultancy and Integrated Models of Operations Support to an Investigation Specialist roles are usually filled by a specialist member from that function (e.g. the High Tech Crime Operations (HTCO) coordinator is a full time member of HTCO). Specialist support areas would be co-opted as an as needs basis during the investigation. Investigators should engage with the requisite specialists early in the investigation. THIS DOCUMENTS HAS BEEN DE-CLASSIFIED AND PUBLISHED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT 1982 (COMMONWEALTH) INFORMATION PUBLICATION SCHEME (IPS) AFP Investigations D octrine Chapter 06 Investigations M anagem ent 32 UNCLASSIFIED UNCLASSIFIED Role of an SIO. The role of SIO may include the following elements: • Leadership, management, direction and coordination of all aspects of the investigation • Primary decision making authority for investigative matters within the respective jurisdiction. This does not prevent the review of an SIO’s decision by the JMG • Compliance with the provisions of standing business rules, governance arrangements and/or inter-agency agreements applicable to the crime type and jurisdictions involved • Establishment of an IC (see below) • Determination of an appropriate case management system to assist in achieving the outcomes of the investigation • Establishment of investigative structures and disciplines as determined by the circumstances • Management of information, evidence and intelligence exchange with participating agencies, in accordance with legislative requirements • Provision of status and progress reports to the JMG • Responsibility for leading investigation planning • Close cooperation with the chain of command and participating agencies in order to exploit opportunities for developing intelligence that may lead to preventative/disruptive action, taking into consideration the overriding importance of public safety, as well as the need to protect sensitive sources and techniques • Provision of advice to the JMG concerning evidentiary matters, recognising that whilst a criminal prosecution will usually be the preferred outcome, there may be circumstances in criminal investigations where other forms of action may be deemed more appropriate • Ensure any proposed media releases do not compromise investigations or police methodology. Terms of Reference. The JMG will appoint an SIO by means of a written Terms of Reference. The Terms of Reference will clearly stipulate: • The appointment of a specific individual as the SIO for the investigation • The scope of the investigation • The requirement for the SIO to prepare and submit investigation planning documents to the JMG for approval • The resources available to the SIO including authority for overtime and travel and the investigation’s operating budget • The authority by which the SIO may deploy resources under their command in accordance with the approved Investigation Plan • The investigation management system to be used. THIS DOCUMENTS HAS BEEN DE-CLASSIFIED AND PUBLISHED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT 1982 (COMMONWEALTH) INFORMATION PUBLICATION SCHEME (IPS) AFP Investigations D octrine Chapter 06 Investigations M anagem ent 33 UNCLASSIFIED UNCLASSIFIED Coordinator/Superintendent Coordinators are responsible for managing the conduct of investigations, particularly those investigations where an SIO has not been appointed. Subject to any governance, joint agency agreements or the appointment of an SIO for a particular investigation, the Coordinator is the primary decision maker and final arbiter on investigative matters. Coordinators set the strategic direction of an investigation and ensure the direction is adhered to. The Coordinator is the principal advocate for the investigation when engaging senior management and other AFP business areas to secure appropriate resources or any issues arising that require senior executive action. The Coordinator will ensure that relevant information determined by the senior executive is appropriately disseminated to investigations staff. The Coordinator is not expected to have detailed knowledge of the minutiae of each investigation but will rely on Crime Managers and/or Team Leaders to ensure that all relevant information is provided to them. The responsibilities of a Coordinator in the management of an investigation (where an SIO is not appointed) include: • Setting the strategic direction related to the overall coordination of investigations under their command • Maintaining oversight of all investigations under their command to ensure quality and timely progression • Taking responsibility as the final arbiter on decisions made in investigations under their command (this does not prevent the review of investigative decisions by the normal chain of command process) • Ensuring the risk fundamentals of identifying, analysing, evaluating and treating risk are enacted • Ensuring compliance with governance processes and relevant legislation, policy and practice • Maintaining oversight of the investigative structures and disciplines established by the Team Leader and ensuring those structures are appropriately resourced as determined by the circumstances • Approving Investigations Plans as required • Oversighting and approving status and progress reports through the normal chain of command • Assisting in the development of any media strategy and where appropriate, performs the role of police spokesperson • Overseeing the information exchange between partner agencies to exploit opportunities for developing intelligence that may lead to preventative or disruptive action. Team Leader/Sergeant Team Leaders provide the direct, day-to-day field leadership for investigative teams. Team Leaders must provide dynamic leadership and ensure that their members are well briefed, have appropriate support and are focussed on investigative priorities The span of control for a Team Leader will mostly (but not always) be limited to one team, which will be part of the broader investigative effort. The exact duties of a Team Leader in investigations management will vary depending on their skills and their formal role within an investigative management structure, but in general they will include: • Ensuring that strategic intent is implemented by the investigative team and that the conduct of investigative activities is in accordance with jurisdictional law, AFP governance and the prosecution/judicial process • Responsibility for guiding the development of the Investigation Plan(s) THIS DOCUMENTS HAS BEEN DE-CLASSIFIED AND PUBLISHED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT 1982 (COMMONWEALTH) INFORMATION PUBLICATION SCHEME (IPS) AFP Investigations D octrine Chapter 06 Investigations M anagem ent 34 UNCLASSIFIED UNCLASSIFIED • Ensuring that resources are efficiently and effectively utilised, and that for complex investigations, an integrated approach is adopted by the multiple teams involved in the investigation • Managing the identification, assessment and treatment of risk • Advising on the identification, selection and application of investigative techniques • Maintaining awareness of legislative/policy changes and how such changes affect investigative activities and ensure these are adhered to • Guiding and advising the development of innovative investigative strategies and prioritising tasks in accordance with investigative strategies • Identifying efficiencies by reviewing the conduct of the investigation, the progress of tasks and where appropriate apply new methods • Ensuring that the investigative team maintains the integrity of all information gathered, in accordance with AFP requirements • Conducting regular supervisory reviews • Vetting briefs of evidence to ensure all offence elements are satisfied • Maintaining awareness of all pertinent information relating to their team’s investigations. Case Officer The Case Officer is the investigator that manages the case file. This makes them the hub of all coordination in the investigation and the person most familiar with the case and investigative progress. They oversee all investigative inquiries and investigator deployment. The Case Officer will report to either their Team Leader or to the SIO (if appointed). The specific role and the decision-making and administrative responsibilities of the Case Officer will vary in accordance with the dimensions of the investigation. In a small investigation, the Case Officer may have primary responsibility for developing and implementing the investigation plan and managing assigned and supporting resources. As the risk, scale and complexity increase, many of the key operational decisions may be retained by more senior personnel; but the Case Officer will often assist and advise on these decisions (including developing the investigative strategy). Information Coordinator This investigator is responsible for information flow within the investigation team. They ensure that all information collected during the investigation is recorded and collated appropriately. The Information Coordinator and their team (if assigned) ensure the quality and integrity of investigative data recorded. Interview Coordinator This investigator is responsible for the planning and management of arrest and post-arrest interviews. This includes assignment of interviewers, consolidation of interview plans and statements and coordinating assistance to interviewers. This role also prepares applications for necessary legal instruments required, such as time extensions for detention and oversees compliance with legislative and governance requirements. Disclosure Coordinator The Disclosure Coordinator is responsible to coordinate and oversee the recording and handling of all potentially disclosable material throughout the course of the investigation. During the conduct of any judicial action, THIS DOCUMENTS HAS BEEN DE-CLASSIFIED AND PUBLISHED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT 1982 (COMMONWEALTH) INFORMATION PUBLICATION SCHEME (IPS)