Gov. Linda Lingle has vetoed a bill that would have required county taxpayers to fund the legal defense of any police officer accused of civil or criminal violations while on duty or special duty.

House Bill 987 would have covered "any" action while on duty or on special duty. It also would cover an off-duty officer who was performing a police duty, such as an arrest.

The measure died last year but was resurrected this session and passed out of the Legislature on March 4.

"As written, this bill is overly broad and could place the counties in a position that they would have to defend a police officer when he committed a criminal act," said Lingle, in a written statement. "An officer while on patrol, engaged in a drug deal or robbed a bank would have an absolute entitlement to a county attorney.

"We acknowledge the police officer's work places them in confrontational situations that may lead to accusations of civil or criminal wrongdoing. We are sympathetic to the concerns expressed by police officers and SHOPO who are not confident that all deserving officers receive legal representation."

Lingle continued to say that the community, including most police officers, should not be forced to pay for the extreme actions of a small minority of officers. If the bill language was amended, following discussions between the counties and the State of Hawaii Organization of Police Officers, she would support it if it "made it more likely deserving officers would receive legal representation."

It was Lingle's first veto of the year.

SHOPO maintains that officers should receive representation from the county until it is clear that the law was violated.

Officers work in a confrontational profession where criminals can falsely accuse and still receive their day in court, forcing an officer to pay for legal representation, said Tenari R. Maafala, SHOPO president.

"We're not in support of (legal defense) for officers who out and out get involved in criminal activities or conduct or organizations. We want officers to receive representation (from the county) up until the point that there is a clear violation of the law," Maafala said. "With all due respect to the (four county) police commissions, we want more involvement by the corporation counsels. We want their input and their legal advice."

Maafala said SHOPO attorneys are reviewing a proposal to revise the bill from attorneys representing all four counties. Maafala said SHOPO would decide on the proposal within a few days, and if it accepted the changes, it hoped to submit the amended legislation to the House this session.

"We respect the governor's position and her decision to veto the bill. We have no ill will. It is really a county issue even though it is state law," he said.

Members of the county police commissions said they support working with SHOPO to reach a fair bill that protects the officers' due process but prevents blanket legal representation.

Another sticking point in the bill would have been a timetable imposed on police commissions. Officers request legal representation through the county police commissions. Currently, there is no time limit on the commission's decision whether to approve or deny the officer's request and pass that recommendation on to the county.

The bill required the commission to act within seven days of getting the request. The police commissions felt that was too little time to investigate an officer's request and the merits of the case.

The Honolulu Police Commission receives an average of 50 requests for legal assistance each year and rarely rejects more than one or two, said Christine H.H. Camp, chairwoman of the commission.

"The last thing we want is a law that covers any misdeeds of an officer done while on duty and the governor recognized it," Camp said. "There are issues, and they are going to be fixed."

The Maui police commission sent a letter to Lingle asking her to veto the bill but supports amending the legislation and re-submitting it.

"The current language, we felt, could cause cases (without merit) to be covered at the expense of the taxpayer. That's just not the way we wanted to go," said Doreen Gomes, vice-chairwoman of the Maui Police Commission. "There are some language changes that we're going to look at and work on."

Reach Peter Boylan at pboylan@honoluluadvertiser.com.