The Metropolitan Police says it no longer needs soldiers who were on standby as armed officers stepped back from duties.
Firearms specialists from other forces will still be drafted in to support the Met during the revolt, which stems from a decision to charge an armed officer with murder.
However, the force said enough firearms officers have now returned for it to be able to meet its counterterrorism responsibilities without military help.
Earlier, the Met said “a number of officers have taken the decision to step back from armed duties while they consider their position” and “that number has increased over the past 48 hours”.
“To ensure that we can continue to keep the public safe and respond to any eventualities, from Saturday evening Met firearms officers will be supported by a limited number of armed officers from other UK forces,” the force added.
The crisis has emerged after a police officer was charged with murder over the shooting of 24-year-old Chris Kaba, who was killed in September last year in Streatham Hill, south London.
Image: A police officer has been charged with the murder of Chris Kaba (pictured)
The officer accused of his murder is named only as NX121 after a district judge granted an anonymity order.
The force’s commissioner Sir Mark Rowley welcomed a review into the situation by Home Secretary Suella Braverman to ensure armed officers “have the confidence to do their job”.
It was also backed by Prime Minister Rishi Sunak, who said armed officers need “clarity” about their legal powers.
Advertisement
Speaking to broadcasters during a visit to a community centre in Hertfordshire, Mr Sunak said armed officers are “making life or death decisions in a split-second to keep us safe” and “they deserve our gratitude for their bravery”.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
0:44
Will police get better legal protection?
He added: “Now it is important when they are using these legal powers that they do so with clarity, and they have certainty about what they are doing, especially given the lethality they are using.
“That is why the home secretary has asked her department to review the guidance that the officers are operating under to make sure it is robust and that it commands the confidence, not just of the officers, but of the public as well.
“Obviously it wouldn’t be right for me to speculate on ongoing cases, but that is what we are doing.”
What legal protections do armed police officers have?
Most police officers in the UK do not routinely carry firearms. Where firearms support is needed, it is carried out by specially accredited firearms officers (AFOs) who are trained, including to assess intelligence and threats.
Duties include responding to high-risk incidents; taking part in operations where intelligence suggests firearms support may be required; providing public reassurance at events; providing enhanced and ballistic medical aid to help save lives and working closely with partners, including the military.
Despite making important and often time-critical decisions, they are still accountable under the law for their actions.
Under the law, armed police officers have the right to discharge a firearm to make a lawful arrest, defend themselves from unlawful violence and to protect others from harm – if they have reasonable grounds for believing there is an imminent danger to life.
The Home Office code of practice on police use of firearms in England and Wales stipulates “all force used must be reasonable in the circumstances”.
In Scottish law, a police officer is not entitled to discharge a firearm against a person unless the officer has reasonable grounds for believing that the person is committing – or about to commit – an action likely to endanger the life or cause serious injury to the officer or any other person, and there is no other way to prevent the danger.
As with all use of force by police officers, if the force used results in death, then the European Convention of Human Rights only allows “the use of force which is no more than absolutely necessary”.
The question of whether a use of force was absolutely necessary in the circumstances is one that depends to a large degree on the facts of the individual case.
The onus is on the individual officer to justify their actions in court.
‘London isn’t as safe as it was’
Earlier, former firearms officer with the Met Police, Tony Long, told Sky News that the action has made London less safe, saying: “The only reason [Sir Mark Rowley is paying attention now] is because… they’ve withdrawn their services because of their concerns, and he’s left with a situation where he’s having to call in the military.
“He’s having to get much-lesser-trained officers to step up to do jobs that they’re literally not trained to do, and at the same time, try and convince you all… it’s business as usual.
“It isn’t business as usual – the public in London are not as safe as they would be if armed response vehicles, officers and counter-terror specialist firearms officers were being allowed to do their job.”
‘Public expects us to be held to highest standards’
In his letter, Sir Mark suggested legal changes over the way self-defence is interpreted in police misconduct cases, the introduction of a criminal standard of proof for unlawful killing in inquests and inquiries, and changes to the threshold at which the Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC) can launch an investigation.
“It is essential that we have a system which commands the confidence of officers and the communities they serve,” he wrote.
“Of course, where wrongdoing takes place, the public expect us to be held to the highest standards.
“I have been clear on this in all areas of policing, and the use of force must be no exception.
“The system that judges officers’ actions should be rooted in integrity and decisions should be reached swiftly, competently and without fear or favour.
“A review is needed to address accountability mechanisms, including the policies and practices of the Independent Office for Police Conduct and the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS), ideally with a focus on the threshold for investigating police use of force and involvement in pursuits.”
A 15-year-old boy who was operated on twice by a now unlicensed Great Ormond Street surgeon is living with “continuous” pain.
Finias Sandu has been told by an independent review the procedures he underwent on both his legs were “unacceptable” and “inappropriate” for his age.
The teenager from Essex was born with a condition that causes curved bones in his legs.
Aged seven, a reconstructive procedure was carried out on Finias’s left leg, lengthening the limb by 3.5cm.
A few years later, the same operation was carried out on his right leg which involved wearing an invasive and heavy metal frame for months.
He has now been told by independent experts these procedures should not have taken place and concerns have been raised over a lack of imaging being taken prior to the operations.
Image: Yaser Jabbar rescinded his UK medical licence last year. Pic: LinkedIn
His doctor at London’s prestigious Great Ormond Street Hospital was former consultant orthopaedic surgeon Yaser Jabbar. Sky News has spoken to others he treated.
Mr Jabbar also did not arrange for updated scans or for relevant X-rays to be conducted ahead of the procedures.
The surgeries have been found to have caused Finias “harm” and left him in constant pain.
“The pain is there every day, every day I’m continuously in pain,” he told Sky News.
“It’s not something really sharp, although it does get to a certain point where it hurts quite a lot, but it’s always there. It just doesn’t leave, it’s a companion to me, just always there.”
Mr Jabbar rescinded his UK medical licence in January last year after working at Great Ormond Street between 2017 and 2022.
The care of his 700-plus patients is being assessed, with some facing corrective surgery, among them Finias.
“Trusting somebody is hard to do, knowing what they have done to me physically and emotionally, you know, it’s just too much to comprehend for me,” he said.
“It wasn’t something just physically, like my leg pain and everything else. It was emotionally, because I put my trust in that specific doctor. My parents and I don’t really understand the more scientific terms, we just went by what he said.”
Doctors refused to treat Finias because of his surgeries
Finias and his family relocated to their native Romania soon after the reconstructive frame was removed from his right leg in the summer of 2021.
The pain worsened and they sought advice from doctors in Romania, who refused to treat Finias because of the impact of his surgeries.
Dozens of families seeking legal claims
His mother Cornelia Sandu is “furious” and feels her trust in the hospital has been shattered. They are now among dozens of families seeking legal claims.
Cyrus Plaza from Hudgell Solicitors is representing the family. He said: “In cases where it has been identified that harm was caused, we want to see Great Ormond Street Hospital agreeing to pay interim payments of compensation for the children, so that if they need therapy or treatment now, they can access it.”
Finias is accessing therapy and mental health support as he prepares for corrective surgery later in the year.
A spokesperson for Great Ormond Street Hospital told Sky News: “We are deeply sorry to Finias and his family, and all the patients and families who have been impacted.
“We want every patient and family who comes to our hospital to feel safe and cared for. We will always discuss concerns families may have and, where they submit claims, we will work to ensure the legal process can be resolved as quickly as possible.”
Image: Finias with his mother and sister
Service not ‘safe for patients’
Sky News has attempted to contact Mr Jabbar.
An external review into the wider orthopaedic department at the hospital began in September 2022.
It was commissioned after the Royal College of Surgeons warned the hospital’s lower limb reconstruction service was not “safe for patients or adequate to meet demand”.
The investigation is expected to be completed by the end of the year.
Sir Keir Starmer has said closer ties with the EU will be good for the UK’s jobs, bills and borders ahead of a summit where he could announce a deal with the bloc.
The government is set to host EU leaders in London on Monday as part of its efforts to “reset” relations post-Brexit.
A deal granting the UK access to a major EU defence fund could be on the table, according to reports – but disagreements over a youth mobility scheme and fishing rights could prove to be a stumbling block.
The prime minister has appeared to signal a youth mobility deal could be possible, telling The Times that while freedom of movement is a “red line”, youth mobility does not come under this.
His comment comes after Kaja Kallas, the EU’s high representative for foreign affairs, said on Friday work on a defence deal was progressing but “we’re not there yet”.
Sir Keir met European Commission president Ursula von der Leyen later that day while at a summit in Albania.
Image: Ursula von der Leyen and Sir Keir had a brief meeting earlier this week. Pic: PA
Sir Keir said: “First India, then the United States – in the last two weeks alone that’s jobs saved, faster growth and wages rising.
“More money in the pockets of British working people, achieved through striking deals not striking poses.
“Tomorrow, we take another step forward, with yet more benefits for the United Kingdom as the result of a strengthened partnership with the European Union.”
Spreaker
This content is provided by Spreaker, which may be using cookies and other technologies.
To show you this content, we need your permission to use cookies.
You can use the buttons below to amend your preferences to enable Spreaker cookies or to allow those cookies just once.
You can change your settings at any time via the Privacy Options.
Unfortunately we have been unable to verify if you have consented to Spreaker cookies.
To view this content you can use the button below to allow Spreaker cookies for this session only.
Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch has said she is “worried” about what the PM might have negotiated.
Ms Badenoch – who has promised to rip up the deal with the EU if it breaches her red lines on Brexit – said: “Labour should have used this review of our EU trade deal to secure new wins for Britain, such as an EU-wide agreement on Brits using e-gates on the continent.
“Instead, it sounds like we’re giving away our fishing quotas, becoming a rule-taker from Brussels once again and getting free movement by the back door. This isn’t a reset, it’s a surrender.”
Roman Lavrynovych appeared at Westminster Magistrates’ Court on Friday and was remanded in custody.
Officers from the Metropolitan Police’s Counter Terrorism Command led the investigation because of the connections to the prime minister.
Emergency services were called to a fire in the early hours of Monday at a house in Kentish Town, north London, where Sir Keir lived with his family before the election.