Police officers guilty of gross misconduct or who fail vetting checks will face automatic dismissal.
The move in England and Wales will see chief constables or their deputies chair misconduct hearings, rather than an independent lawyer under the current system.
Any finding of gross misconduct will mean that the officer is automatically dismissed, unless there are exceptional circumstances.
Chief constables will also be able to challenge decisions to dismiss.
Police misconduct dismissals
Met Police commissioner: ‘It’s nonsensical I can’t sack officers’
The Home Office said it would introduce a statutory requirement for police officers to hold vetting. The police regulations which govern officers’ behaviour will also be adjusted to state that officers who fail re-vetting checks while in post will be dismissed.
The changes follow a four-month review looking into the effectiveness of the police officer dismissal process, which was carried out following several high-profile cases of police misconduct, including the murder of Sarah Everard by Metropolitan Police officer Wayne Couzens.
Policing minister Chris Philp said the changes would target the “small minority of police officers who let down the police force, and therefore let down the public”.
“They will make sure there is nowhere to hide for officers who don’t deserve to wear the uniform,” he told BBC Breakfast.
Earlier this year Met Police commissioner Sir Mark Rowley called for legislation that would give chief constables dismissal powers. He said it was “nonsensical” that he could not sack officers, after the Casey Review found the Met was institutionally sexist, racist and homophobic.
Sir Mark said he was glad ministers had recognised the need for “substantial change”.
However, the Police Federation of England and Wales (PFEW) said that putting chief constables on misconduct panels was a “huge retrograde step” when police forces were trying to restore public confidence.
National chair Steve Hartshorne said: “Corrupt officers have no place in the police service. We agree the police dismissals process must be robust to remove officers who do not belong in the service as swiftly as possible, and can be strengthened, however, many of the regulation changes set to go ahead completely go against what we warned in our submission to the Home Office.
“Legally qualified chairs (LQCs) were introduced for sound and legally reasoned judgments, reduced appeals, fair and consistent decisions, greater transparency and increased public confidence. It was a system which was working, and the government should have taken steps towards strengthening the role of LQCs, who were unbiased and free of undue political and social pressures.
“A return to the dark days, a return to kangaroo courts, whereby an officer is already guilty in the eyes of the chief officer before any evidence is heard, and they already know what outcome they want to see, is deeply concerning.”
He said that giving chief constables the power to challenge could see them “appeal until they get the outcome they want”.
PFEW is calling for the introduction of a 12-month time limit on disciplinary investigations. Deputy national chair Tiff Lynch said: “Disciplinary investigations take too long to conclude. In the Baroness Casey Review it was highlighted that on average, the Met takes 400 days to finalise misconduct cases – but this is a nationwide problem.
“Latest statistics show one in eight cases still take more than 12 months to conclude, according to the Home Office.
“We are proposing legislation which would give legally qualified persons power to impose deadlines on investigations which have dragged on for a year.”
Last year, the College of Policing published guidance that said officers who are violent against women should be automatically dismissed.
Sign up to our weekly round-up of HR news and guidance
Receive the Personnel Today Direct e-newsletter every Wednesday
HR opportunities in the public sector on Personnel Today
Browse more HR opportunities in the public sector