The chairman of the Independent Commission on Police Complaints (ICPC), Mr Paul Donnelly, has written a 15-page "commentary" containing detailed criticism of the handling of complaints against the RUC made by the murdered solicitor, Ms Rosemary Nelson.
The document, which was leaked to the Irish News in Belfast, is dated April 28th, 1999.
Ms Nelson was killed by loyalist paramilitaries in March. She had repeatedly complained of harassment and death threats made against her by RUC officers.
Complaints against the RUC are normally investigated by RUC officers, although the complaints commission assigns an official to oversee the internal inquiry.
In 1998 the commission raised "serious concerns" about the way the internal RUC investigation into Ms Nelson's allegations was proceeding.
The RUC investigators were then removed and replaced by officers from the London Metropolitan Police.
The Met officer in charge, Commander N.G. Mulvihill, was also asked to carry out a "review" of how the RUC had handled the investigation.
His findings were only published when the complaints commission's original concerns were leaked to the media.
In his commentary, Mr Donnelly says he disagrees with Commander Mulvihill's assessment that there was "nothing sinister or undermining" in the RUC's classification of Ms Nelson's complaint as a mere "incivility" after initially refusing to investigate it at all.
"For a case to come into the complaints system, after initial refusal to acknowledge its status as a complaint and then to be categorised as `incivility' could be construed as representing both resistance to and trivialisation of a serious matter on the part of the RUC," Mr Donnelly states.
The complaints commission chairman also raises the issue of the behaviour of RUC officers during the inquiry which in his opinion gave the impression "subconsciously or unintentionally" of undermining the investigation.
Mr Donnelly is furthermore concerned that, unlike in England and Wales where police officers under investigation are only given details of the allegations against them, RUC officers received "full witness statements . . . after each statement was made".
"Commander Mulvihill recommends that this practice be reconsidered. Others might view it to be an outrageous, systematic undermining of the investigative process . . . Matching the above with the nature of the complaints made, the reluctance of witnesses to attend at police stations and the attitudes they expect to encounter, the remarkable fact is that any witnesses come forward in such circumstances," Mr Donnelly writes.
He also criticises the RUC Chief Constable, Sir Ronnie Flanagan, for accusing the complaints commission of "subjectivity".
He says the commission's report was based on "a systematic evaluation of the facts" rather than the "subjective view of one individual", as alleged by Sir Ronnie.
An RUC spokesman yesterday confirmed that the force had received Mr Donnelly's commentary.
He said a working party consisting of the RUC, ICPC, NIO and the office of Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Constabularies had been set up to process the recommendations made by Commander Mulvihill.
He added that the commission chairman's commentary had been passed to the Director of Public Prosecutions and to Mr Colin Port, the English police officer in charge of the investigation into Ms Nelson's killing, "to consider whether the commentary indicated any further line of inquiry to be pursued or any further investigation to be carried out".
"At this stage no such conclusion has been reached," the spokesman said.