Police Sergeant Sadiq Al-Hasani is due to appear at Westminster Magistrates’ Court on Tuesday, 30 September, after being charged with perverting the course of justice in connection with an investigation involving Charing Cross police station.
The charge concerns an alleged incident on 2 October 2025. The police watchdog has said the sergeant allegedly approached a junior officer who was a potential key witness in the wider inquiry, intending to obstruct or interfere with that inquiry. The force has described the allegation in slightly different terms: that he deliberately sought to discourage another officer from making a statement to the watchdog.
Those are allegations, not findings of fact. The charge does not establish that the alleged conduct occurred, and the court process will deal with the case. No outcome from the listed hearing had been included in the public announcements before the appearance was due to take place.
Timeline of the case
The officer, who is 37, was arrested on 2 October 2025 following the alleged incident at Charing Cross police station. The watchdog said it opened this strand of its work after receiving a mandatory conduct referral from the force on 3 October 2025. Its investigation concluded in June, when it referred a file of evidence to prosecutors. Prosecutors then authorised the charge, which was brought on 13 August.
The announcement of the charge came later, on 29 September. The sergeant remains suspended from duty. Suspension is an employment status while a matter is being dealt with; it is not a disciplinary or criminal finding in itself.
A separate criminal process
The case sits within a much wider examination of alleged behaviour linked to Charing Cross police station. That wider work began after an undercover television programme was broadcast in October 2025. The watchdog has previously issued updates on disciplinary cases involving other officers and staff connected to the same station.
The criminal case should nevertheless be kept distinct from those disciplinary developments. A misconduct outcome involving another person, or an ongoing investigation into another member of staff, does not determine the allegation against Mr Al-Hasani. Equally, the charge in this case does not decide the outcome of the wider inquiry. Each process turns on its own evidence and the relevant legal or professional procedure.
For the immediate case, the allegation is narrowly focused on what is said to have happened when a potential witness was asked to provide information. The public statements say the officer was alleged to have tried to affect whether that person made a statement to the watchdog. They do not set out any evidence that has been tested in court, nor do they give an account from the defendant.
What is known ahead of the hearing
The listed venue is Westminster Magistrates’ Court. Public statements issued before the hearing identify the charge, the alleged date of the incident, the earlier investigation and the officer’s suspended status. They do not set out a plea, a hearing result or any court finding. It would therefore be wrong to present the allegation as proved or to infer what will happen at the hearing.
The appearance is a significant procedural step because it brings a case that had been investigated by the watchdog and considered by prosecutors before a magistrates’ court. But its significance lies in the charge and the opportunity for the legal process to begin in open court, rather than in any conclusion about guilt. Further reporting should distinguish clearly between the accusation, the charge, the hearing and any later decision by the court.
