The Queensland police service refused to pursue disciplinary action against an officer accused of multiple acts of serious domestic violence against his heavily pregnant partner and “interfering with the course of justice” to weaken the terms of her protection order.

The circumstances of the case, revealed in a Queensland tribunal judgment this month, prompted a legal challenge by state’s Crime and Corruption Commission.

The tribunal found the QPS erred and ordered them to instigate a belated disciplinary investigation against the officer, who was stood down on full pay in 2022 due to the allegations.

The officer – who also faces criminal charges – left the QPS in 2023 after being declared medically unfit.

_{Sign up: AU Breaking News email}

Police decided last year there was “no tangible benefit” to conducting disciplinary action against the officer – who also faces four criminal charges related to alleged domestic violence offending – and decided not to investigate.

The Queensland Public Service Administration Act contains discretionary powers that allow police officers to be subject to internal disciplinary proceedings after they have left the QPS.

In practice, these powers are rarely used. The 2022 inquiry into police responses to domestic and family violence heard cases where internal disciplinary processes into allegations of serious misconduct were not finalised because officers resigned or retired.

The tribunal found the QPS “failed to give sufficient weight and consideration to the conduct” of the officer, which occurred “over a protracted period”.

The allegations included “multiple acts of physical violence upon the former officer’s heavily-pregnant ex-partner, posing a serious risk to not only her but also her unborn child”.

They also included allegations of “repeated violations of the law and ongoing disobedience to lawful authority”, and threats to kill and cause harm.

The tribunal found the former officer’s alleged “interference in the course of justice was [premeditated] and involved a significant degree of coercion”.

“This conduct ultimately resulted in conditions under a Temporary Protection Order being relaxed and [placing] the aggrieved at risk,” the judgment said.

The CCC argued – and the tribunal agreed – that the decision-maker, Acting Detective Supt Christopher Hansel, failed to properly consider the seriousness of the grounds for disciplinary action.

In his initial decision, Hansel ruled there was “no tangible benefit in having these matters investigated where the matters are still continuing through the court’s process”.

The tribunal said this conclusion was “misconceived and not supported by the evidence” before Hansel when he made the decision.

“Regardless of the outcome of the court process, the benefit to the QPS would be that the former officer’s conduct would be properly assessed internally within the QPS and, if found liable for disciplinary action, a disciplinary declaration would have been made,” the tribunal said.

“[Hansel’s] decision means that the former officer would escape that process.”

The CCC also argued the disciplinary investigation would have “conveyed a broader benefit by the QPS maintaining public confidence in its handling of serious disciplinary allegations of this nature”.

Last month, the QPS announced it would scrap its specialist domestic and family violence command. In doing so, senior officers argued that the service had addressed cultural failings highlighted by the 2022 inquiry.