THE police officer who drove the Land Rover to which Sinn Fein's Gerry Kelly was filmed clinging will receive an "informed warning" - but had not been informed of it when The Irish News contacted his union last night.
Mr Kelly revealed that he received an "informed warning" for holding on to the vehicle following a contentious parade in June last year.
The Public Prosecution Service (PPS) has also confirmed that a police officer will receive the same sanction over his driving.
However, the Police Federation last night said the officer and his lawyers had not been formally told about the reprimand.
Although not a conviction, an informed warning remains on a person's criminal record for 12 months.
Refusing to accept the reprimand can lead to prosecution through the courts.
Federation chairman Terry Spence said the fact the officer was not given prior notice of the reprimand was a "denial of natural justice".
"The officer has not been issued with any informed warning - the officer knows nothing about this," he said.
Mr Spence also said he was surprised by the move and said he did not know whether the officer would accept the warning.
"Mr Kelly has accepted an element of this by accepting the informed warning and on the basis of that I would have thought the matter would have been closed," he said.
"The officer knows nothing about any such informed warning. If such a matter is issued it would be up to the officer to decide whether to accept or reject. If he rejects it, this federation will take all necessary steps to defend the officer."
Mr Kelly was filmed holding on to the armoured PSNI vehicle in the Peter's
Hill area of Belfast following the Tour of the North parade, claiming he was forced to do so after failing to stop it.
He was reported to the PPS for impeding police. The driver was referred to the Police Ombudsman.
It is understood the officer will receive his reprimand by today.
A PPS spokeswoman said: "The test for prosecution is met in the case involving Mr Gerard Kelly MLA and the police officer. Having regard to all the circumstances of the case, it was concluded that a diversionary disposal was appropriate."