Overview

Anonymity (MPS Applications II), Restriction Order Approach

This was the second such hearing in the Undercover Policing Inquiry on the anonymity applications of former Special Demonstration Squad undercovers and managers, mostly being made by the Metropolitan Police Service.

It was the first open hearing which focused on specific applications being made. The main legal principles having been set out in a ruling by the Inquiry’s first Chair, Sir Christopher Pitchford, following previous hearings, the main point of discussion for this hearing was how they applied to the various anonymity applications now before the Inquiry.

The first day had Phillippa Kaufmann KC, speaking on behalf of the concerns being raised by the non-state core participants, taking a more general approach. 

The second day then looked at the specific applications made on behalf of 13 SDS officers:

The end of the second day dealt with an ancillary issue. In support of the anonymity applications, Chief Constable Alan Pughsley had submitted a statement which included the claim that there had been a decline in applications to become undercover officers which he believed was due in part to the spycops scandal and also the Undercover Policing Inquiry itself. 

In response, the UCPI’s legal team had requested a statement from the College of Policing which was provided by Louise Meade. Counsel to the Inquiry noted that her statement showed there was no statistical corroboration for Pughsley's claim, but also that the changes in approach now focused on weeding out unsuitable candidates much earlier in the process, so that only the most suitable actually applied.

Following a short debate on trying to resolve the two viewpoints, Sir John Mitting (who had recently taken over as Inquiry Chair following the death of the previous Chair, Sir Christopher Pitchford) took the view that it was probably impossible, and in any case:

I have to get at the truth. If the truth is uncomfortable and deters people from volunteering to be undercover officers, so be it.

Speakers

Day 1
CounselClients
David Barr KCUCPI
Phillippa Kaufmann KCNon-State Core Participants
Other counsel presentClients
Emma GargitterUCPI
Ruth BranderNon-State Core Participants
Adam PayterMetropolitan Police
Robert McAllisterDesignated Lawyers Officers
Claire PalmerDesignated Lawyers Officers
Genevieve WoodsSlater & Gordon clients
Richard O’BrienNational Crime Agency
Maya SikandPeter Francis
Sir Robert Francis KCNational Police Chiefs Council
Amy MannionMetropolitan Police
Andrew O’Connor KCNational Crime Agency
Day 2
Counsel / IndividualClients
David Barr KCUCPI
Phillippa Kaufmann KCNon-State Core Participants
Maya SikandPeter Francis
Jonathan Hall KCMetropolitan Police
Oliver Sanders KCDesignated Lawyers Officers
Helen SteelNSCPs (Litigant-in-Person)
Ben Brandon Slater & Gordon / HN58

 

 

 

 

 

 

All
Transcripts
Procedural

Transcripts

Title
Hearing Day
Index
Transcript of UCPI Procedural Hearing 8: Anonymity II, Restriction Order Approach (Day 2)
Transcript of UCPI Procedural Hearing 8: Anonymity II, Restriction Order Approach (Day 1)

Procedural

Date
Title
Document Type
Topic
SDS officers – Restriction Orders (Ruling 1)
Ruling
Anonymity
Press Notice: Ruling on Special Demonstration Squad anonymity applications
Press Notice
Anonymity
Transcript of UCPI Procedural Hearing 8: Anonymity II, Restriction Order Approach (Day 2)
Transcript
Anonymity, Restriction order approach, Photographs
Transcript of UCPI Procedural Hearing 8: Anonymity II, Restriction Order Approach (Day 1)
Transcript
Anonymity, Restriction order approach, Neither Confirm Nor Deny
Speaking order for hearing of 20-22 November 2017
Supporting material
Anonymity
Guardian News – Submissions on restriction order applications for hearing of 21-22 November 2017
Submissions
Anonymity
Peter Francis – Submissions re Minded-To Note of 23 October 2017 re restriction order applications
Submissions
Anonymity
NPCC – Submissions for hearing of 20-22 November 2017
Submissions
Anonymity
NCA – Submissions for hearing of 20-22 November 2017 re ROA 1974 and anonymity applications
Submissions
Anonymity
MPS – Submissions re SDS anonymity restriction orders, responding to points made by media and NSCPs
Submissions
Anonymity
Designated Lawyers – Skeleton Argument on behalf of various SDS officers re restriction orders
Submissions
Anonymity
NPCPs – Submissions re Minded Note of 23 October 2017 concerning SDS restriction order applications
Submissions
Anonymity
Directions on the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974 and SDS restriction order applictions (Direction 16)
Direction
Anonymity, Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974
Press Notice: Supplementary Minded-To Note on SDS anonymity applications. Hearing on 20-22 Nov 2017
Press Notice
Anonymity
Witness Statement of Louise Meade
Witness Statement
Anonymity
NSCPs – Submissions re Minded-To Note of 3 August 2017 on restriction order applications
Submissions
Anonymity, Photographs
The Guardian – Submissions on restriction order applications in response to the 3 August 2017 Minded-To Note
Submissions
Anonymity
Peter Francis – Submissions re Minded-To Note of 3 August 2017 on restriction order applications
Submissions
Anonymity
Witness Statement of Geoff Bluemel
Witness Statement
Restriction order approach, Generic restriction order documents
Extracts of statement of Alan Pughsley for NPCC made 27 September 2017
As relied on by the Metropolitan Police Service in support of anonymity applications
Witness Statement
Anonymity, Restriction order approach
Christopher Farrimond – Gist of Witness Statement
Witness Statement
Restriction order approach, Generic restriction order documents