Sir John Stevens said that a crisis had been averted after he personally took charge of talks over the suspension of two officers involved in a fatal shooting. It has now been agreed that the decision to suspend the pair will be reviewed.
At least 125 of the Met's 400-strong SO19 specialist firearms unit had threatened to strike in support of Inspector Neil Sharman and PC Kevin Fagan. They were suspended last Friday following a coroner's court verdict of unlawful killing over the 1999 death of Harry Stanley, who was shot dead when the officers mistook the table leg he was carrying for a shotgun.
The protest had spread from SO19 to all other Met armed units - including Scotland Yard's Flying Squad and the royal and diplomatic protection units - and there were fears it could move outside the capital. The escalation had also sparked concerns that potential terrorist targets could be left with reduced protection.
But the action was called off after Sir John met with Inspector Sharman, together with representatives of the Metropolitan Police Federation. The commissioner agreed to allow a review of the suspensions, at which lawyers and the federation can make representations.
It is understood that last Friday's decision was not taken by Sir John, or his deputy Sir Ian Blair. The federation conceded that guidelines stated senior officers could be suspended in such situations, but insisted there was no mandatory requirement.
Glen Smyth, the Federation's chairman, said he accepted that "there are no guarantees as to what the decision [of the review] might be", but that the important thing was that the suspensions be "properly considered".
Sir John said: "I am grateful to our officers for starting to resume their firearms duties and putting the safety of Londoners and their fellow officers ahead of their own concerns at this time.
"They do need more legal protection for the difficult job they do on our behalf. This cannot be achieved overnight but we are committed to working together to seek changes that will give them confidence to undertake their dangerous and demanding work."
The commissioner said he would address his concerns to the home secretary, David Blunkett, along with proposals for changes to the murder law. He added that since the September 11 attacks, his officers had been living with the heightened threat of suicide bombers.
"Officers with firearms must be subject to the law," he said. "But if they are acting in good faith, they need protection."
Earlier Sir Ian, who will take over as commissioner from Sir John next February, had also demanded a change in the law to provide more protection for officers who pull the trigger. He argued that police forces, rather than individual officers, should bear responsibility for any mistakes.
Writing in the Sun, Sir Ian vowed to "stand by" his armed officers. He said: "In a split second, they make a judgment that can result in death. Get it right and they are heroes. Wrong, and they could face a murder charge.
"Tackling gun crime means fighting fire with fire, putting highly trained armed men and women on the streets, prepared to risk their lives day and night in situations that would be the stuff of nightmares for most of us.
"And how do we thank them? It should be a matter of shame for us all that they are let down when they most need our support."
Sir Ian pointed out that the Crown Prosecution Service had concluded twice that no action should be taken against the two officers in the Stanley case.
"Unless there are indications of gross negligence or recklessness, it is wrong that officers who have followed their training should carry the burden on their own but that is the law as it stands," he said.
"The organisation that asks them to volunteer should take the legal responsibility to compensate and apologise if things go wrong."
