The real story is less dramatic than the headline. MPs want to overturn a ruling that stops police being sued for their failings, and the proposed fix is narrow: remove immunity where officers fabricate evidence, are dishonest, or are negligent.
Narrow is doing a lot of work there. The phrase ‘the rule of law’ will appear in every speech on the subject, usually delivered by a member who has never sat through a disclosure hearing.
Why would anyone need immunity for inventing evidence? Because the alternative is a court that asks questions, and nobody in that building wants to answer them.
Negligence is included, which means a constable who mislays a body camera now faces the same scrutiny as one who invents a confession. The distinction matters less than the press release, which will use the word ‘accountability’ with a straight face.
The bill has not yet passed. The apology, so far, has not been written.