60 (1) The Independent Police Review Director may, in accordance with this section, decide not to deal with a complaint made to him or her by a member of the public under this Part.  2007, c. 5, s. 10. Limitation, six months (2) The Independent Police Review Director may decide not to deal with a complaint made by a member of the public if the complaint is made more than six months after the facts on which it is based occurred.  2007, c. 5, s. 10. Same (3) In making a determination under subsection (2), the Independent Police Review Director shall consider, (a) whether the complainant is a minor or is under a disability within the meaning of the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act, 2005; (b) whether the complainant is or was subject to criminal proceedings in respect of the events underlying the complaint; and (c) whether, having regard to all the circumstances, it is in the public interest for the complaint to be dealt with.  2007, c. 5, s. 10. Frivolous, vexatious, etc. (4) The Independent Police Review Director may decide not to deal with a complaint made by a member of the public if, in his or her opinion, one of the following applies: 1. The complaint is frivolous or vexatious or made in bad faith. 2. The complaint could be more appropriately dealt with, in whole or in part, under another Act or other law. 3. Having regard to all the circumstances, dealing with the complaint is not in the public interest.  2007, c. 5, s. 10. Not affected by policy or service (5) The Independent Police Review Director may decide not to deal with a complaint made by a member of the public about a policy of or service provided by a police force if the policy or service did not have a direct effect on the complainant.  2007, c. 5, s. 10. Not affected by conduct (6) The Independent Police Review Director may decide not to deal with a complaint made by a member of the public about the conduct of a police officer if the complainant is not one of the following: 1. A person at whom the conduct was directed. 2. A person who saw or heard the conduct or its effects as a result of being physically present at the time and place that the conduct or its effects occurred. 3. A person who, i. was in a personal relationship with a person described in paragraph 1 at the time that the conduct occurred, and ii. suffered loss, damage, distress, danger or inconvenience as a result of the conduct. 4. A person who has knowledge of the conduct, or has in his or her possession or under his or her control anything relating to the conduct, if, in the Independent Police Review Director’s opinion, the knowledge or thing constitutes compelling evidence that the conduct complained of is misconduct as defined in section 80 or unsatisfactory work performance and the evidence would likely be admissible in a court proceeding.  2007, c. 5, s. 10. Notice (7) If the Independent Police Review Director decides not to deal with a complaint, other than a complaint described in subsection (9), in accordance with this section, he or she shall notify the complainant and the chief of police of the police force to which the matter relates in writing of the decision, with reasons, and in the case of the chief of police, shall also give notice of the substance of the complaint.  2009, c. 30, s. 53 (1). Same (8) On receipt of a notice under subsection (7) relating to a complaint about the conduct of a police officer other than the chief of police, the chief of police shall promptly notify the police officer who is the subject of the complaint in writing of the substance of the complaint, and of the Independent Police Review Director’s decision not to deal with the complaint, with reasons.  2007, c. 5, s. 10. Same, officer appointed under Interprovincial Policing Act, 2009 (9) If the Independent Police Review Director decides not to deal with a complaint about the conduct of a police officer appointed under the Interprovincial Policing Act, 2009
in accordance with this section, he or she shall notify the complainant and the appointing official or local commander who appointed the police officer under that Act, or a prescribed appointing official, in writing of the decision, with reasons and the substance of the complaint, and the appointing official or local commander shall in turn give the same notification to the police officer who is the subject of the complaint and his or her extra-provincial commander.  2009, c. 30, s. 53 (2). Section Amendments with date in force (d/m/y) 1997, c. 8, s. 35 - 27/11/1997 2007, c. 5, s. 10 - 19/10/2009 2009, c. 30, s. 53 (1, 2) - 05/07/2010 CTS 20 AU 14 - 1