Carmel Napier told the Home Affairs Select Committee she felt threatened by Ian Johnston

Carmel Napier today told the Home Affairs Select Committee she faced a clear threat from Mr Johnston - retire or face humiliation.

Her evidence came after MPs grilled Mr Johnston, who couldn't tell them how much legal advice over the process had cost.

The Argus exclusively revealed last month, following the news of Mrs Napier's retirement, that Mr Johnston had forced Mrs Napier out of Gwent Police.

Mrs Napier told MPs that the May 23 meeting, where Mr Johnston requested Mrs Napier leave, had been simply listed in her diary as a one-to-one meeting between herself and the PCC.

“At no time before the 23rd of May did he say to me that he had any concerns. There had been no conversations about my performance and behaviour,” she said.

She claimed the tone of the document that laid out Mr Johnston's concerns was “menacing and bullying”.

“I felt it was a clear threat. Retire or resign or I will humiliate and dismiss you,” she said.

Mr Johnston stormed out of the office at the end of the meeting, giving her no opportunity to reply, she said.

She said her initial response was to fight it and said his behaviour was not an appropriate or fair way to deal with anyone.

But after seeking legal advice, she discovered PCCs had unfettered powers to remove chief constables, even if she fought it through the formal process.

Mrs Napier said colleagues in Gwent raised concerns about Mr Johnston's behaviour and attitude and there was a sense of fear among senior and middle managers about him.

She accepted the right of Parliament to decide there should be Police and Crime Commissioners – contradicting Mr Johnston's argument she was opposed to the role.

Mrs Napier added she had put in all mechanisms she could to ensure crime recording was accurate as it could be.

Asked if she would run for PCC, she said: “I would always leave the door open.”

After the meeting, Mrs Napier told the Argus that she had no further legal recourse after she agreed to retire.

She said she was not going to get involved in a “ping pong” match after the news emerged of what happened ahead of her retirement.

"For an individual to have such unfettered powers is unprecedented," she said.

Mr Johnston yesterday said notes of the May 23 meeting showed he had not wanted to humiliate her or upset her.

- MR JOHNSTON said problems between him and the chief constable “were much more fundamental” than a clash of personalities, and Mrs Napier did not accept the role of PCC.

He said: “I have statutory duties under the law. The conduct of the chief constable was such that I could not carry out those statutory duties.”

He denied claims he asked Mrs Napier to sign a gagging order, and told the committee there was no pay off for Mrs Napier. He said she had taken a six-month notice period, which he respected.

He added that it wasn't fair to say he held certain views or criticisms of the chief constable before May 23, and said the fact she completed her 30 years of service on May 16 had not bearing on the date of the meeting where he asked Mrs Napier to leave.

But he admitted that he had checked she had completed it, because of a legal case in another force area.