Hillsborough: Labour calls for police officers to be forced to give evidence Shadow home secretary Yvette Cooper: 'much more still needs to be done to strengthen the inquiry arrangements'. Labour will tomorrow demand emergency legislation to compel serving and retired police officers to appear before the Hillsborough inquiry amid doubts that it lacks the necessary power to fully investigate the cover-up into the deaths of 96 Liverpool fans. During a special House of Commons debate on the 1989 disaster, shadow home secretary Yvette Cooper will offer to work with the government to ensure that vital witnesses - including police whose original statements were changed - can be summoned to what is being billed as the biggest-ever inquiry into police malpractice. The Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) said recently that it would conduct a wide-ranging investigation into allegations of police misconduct raised by the Hillsborough independent panel report published last month. It will consider new evidence unearthed by the 395-page report and 450,000 supporting documents. It will be able to recommend criminal charges or disciplinary action against the individuals concerned. The independent panel found that none of the emergency services had effectively mobilised a major incident plan and disclosed that 41 of the victims could have survived had the response been better. It also highlighted how police statements made by officers at the time had been doctored as a part of a systematic cover-up by the authorities that aimed to deflect blame on to Liverpool fans. Last week the government also opened the way for fresh inquests when attorney general Dominic Grieve announced he would apply to the High Court to have the original verdicts of accidental death overturned. The families are pressing for charges of manslaughter against those whose mistakes contributed to the deaths. While the families have welcomed the belated reopening of inquiries, there is concern, however, that the IPCC's remit and powers still leave it unable to compel serving police officers to attend interviews if they are not suspected themselves of criminality or misconduct. It also cannot compel former police officers to give evidence at all. The IPCC has said such limits on its power "seriously undermine public confidence in IPCC investigations." "The inquest will be immensely important," Cooper said. But we also need a comprehensive and criminal investigation into the cover-up. And I am concerned that much more still needs to be done to strengthen the inquiry arrangements. The inquiry will need to get to the bottom of why so many police statements were altered. Yet although the IPCC can pursue officers it believes have committed crimes, it doesn't have the powers to compel serving or former officers to be interviewed as witnesses. Nor can it compel civilians to give evidence. Everything possible should be done now to remove these obstacles to justice for the Hillsborough families. We can't let further inquiries drag on for years because they didn't have the powers or resources to get results. It has also emerged that retired police officers are not liable for any misconduct sanction, raising concerns that former officers involved in any cover-up over Hillsborough will escape all justice. In written evidence recently submitted to the home affairs select committee, the IPCC raised concerns about its inability to summon officers who are not under suspicion of criminal activity. In such cases, its investigators can only seek information through written questions to officers via their solicitors or other representatives. The IPCC said: "Not only can this seriously undermine public confidence ... it can also impact on the overall effectiveness and timeliness of investigations. Relying on the written submission and response of questions is generally a much longer and less satisfactory process than conducting a face to face interview, particularly when investigators need to follow-up answers provided by officers. The commission believes that all public servants - including police officers - should be accountable for their actions. Where a fatal or serious incident following police contact occurs, the public are right to expect that those officers directly involved, or those who witnessed the incident, should be required to provide a detailed account to the body charged with investigating the matter. It is anomalous that regulations require a police officer to attend an IPCC interview if misconduct is alleged (which could include, for example, a speeding offence or an allegation of discriminatory treatment), but not if he or she is involved in or witnesses a death or serious injury.