By Editorial
Once again, serious questions need to be asked about the calibre of scrutiny provided by the Policing Board. 鈥媁e report on page 17 that the board this week did not even discuss the saga around the Police Ombudsman. Instead, scrutiny of the episode has fallen to a retired PSNI head of discipline, Jon Burrows, to this newspaper and a few other media reports. Last month a file linked to Marie Anderson was sent to prosecutors, about an incident when police were reportedly unable to get access to a property linked to her. It should have been obvious to Ms Anderson that she should have stepped aside when the probe began in September 2023. She didn鈥檛, only later taking a leave of absence before returning. Incredibly, after the police probe led to a file for potential perverting the course of justice and misconduct in public office being sent to prosecutors last month, she again stayed in post. Anyone in such a key role would normally not even have that option but would be suspended without prejudice. She was not, and when she did finally step aside she cited 鈥渃ommentary鈥 on it all. We fully respect the need for this overly long process to reach its conclusion free of influence. But we stand by our criticism of Ms Anderson鈥檚 response to those facts that are public. She seems not to grasp that anyone in her role 鈥 with power of judgement of police 鈥 must be seen to act as, and be treated as, the police officers she investigates in such a situation. Alliance, the SDLP and Sinn Fein politicians won鈥檛, it seems clear, demand action, but you would expect unionists at least to be troubled. Some, such as Jim Allister, are. But the response of the Policing Board to this, and to the scandal involving a fantasist 鈥楽ean鈥 and his lies about sectarianism in the PSNI, and to the scapegoating of two officers on the Ormeau Road, has been totally inadequate. Meanwhile, Sinn Fein has one of its wiliest operatives, Gerry Kelly, on the board.