The Authority oversaw a Police investigation following a complaint that officers were carrying pepper spray without appropriate authorisation during a demonstration in Lyttleton on 6 February 2024, and that it was unjustifiably used against a protestor.
Prior to being pepper sprayed, the protestor was standing on the footpath filming the protest group when officers arrested another person nearby.
The protestor complained that while filming the arrests on the road an officer approached the protestor and pushed them back from where they were standing.
The protestor said they then remonstrated with the officer after being pushed. The officer pushed the protestor back again. As the protestor returned to where they were standing, the officer pepper sprayed the protestor in the face. The protestor then retreated into the protest group. The interaction between the officer and the protestor was captured on video.
About thirty minutes later, other officers advanced on the group and arrested the protestor. Police charged the protestor with obstruction and resisting Police. The charges were later withdrawn due to evidential insufficiency.
The Police investigation concluded that the officer who pepper sprayed the protester was properly authorised to carry it, that the protestor’s arrest for obstruction was lawful, and that the use of the pepper spray was justified. Police acknowledged that appropriate aftercare was not given to the protestor.
The Authority agreed that officers were authorised to carry pepper spray, and that appropriate aftercare was not given to the protestor. However, we disagreed with Police on the lawfulness of the arrest and the justification for using pepper spray.
In our view, it was not possible for Police reasonably to conclude that the protestor, who was lawfully standing on the footpath, obstructed the nearby arrest or showed any intention to do so. Additionally, the Police investigation did not establish what grounds officers relied on to arrest the protestor some thirty minutes after the protestor had been pepper sprayed.
With regards to the officer’s deployment of pepper spray, the video does not support the officer’s threat assessment in our view. In any event, the officer had a less violent option available of guiding the protester back. The use of the pepper spray was therefore disproportionate and unjustified.
We do not consider the circumstances warrant criminal charges, but in our assessment, Police should consider initiating an employment process in respect of the officer. Police have declined to do so.
IPCA: 24-21521