The New Dark Age

The Undercover Policing Inquiry will be holding an emergency hearing tomorrow following condemnation of a last-minute decision that effectively closes four weeks of crucial hearings to meaningful public scrutiny. On Thursday the Inquiry announced sweeping restrictions preventing any live streaming of evidence – even to core participants and their legal representatives.

These restrictions claim to respond to privacy concerns about personal information, including unsubstantiated allegations, recorded by undercover officers about the campaigners they targeted. However, the proposed live-streaming ban goes far beyond what’s needed to protect legitimate privacy interests. At least four weeks of hearings are affected, covering evidence dealing with the infiltration of London Greenpeace; spying on Kier Starmer’s as he supported activists defending themselves against McDonald’s; and the targeting of animal right groups, culminating in the evidence of former undercover officer and head of the unit, Bob Lambert (HN10 “Bob Robinson”), who is accused of acting as an agent provocateur and planting an incendiary device in a Debenhams department store. If the restrictions are maintained, his and other evidence will no longer be heard live.

Kate Wilson, speaking on behalf of many core participants said:

“Privacy
concerns were raised over a year ago, but the Inquiry failed to engage
constructively with the victims of state spying to develop workable
solutions. They squandered years dealing with police privacy and state
secrecy, and left disclosure and the privacy concerns of the victims
until the last possible moment. As a result we are seeing poorly
conceived solutions implemented in a panic.”

Following
widespread criticism from core participants, the media, and the public,
the Inquiry are inviting submissions to an eleventh-hour hearing, to challenge the proposed restrictions, which were originally presented as a fait accompli.

Core participants note that:

– Privacy concerns were known about well in advance but not resolved
– Proven existing procedures for handling sensitive evidence have been ignored
– No consultation was undertaken about proportionate alternatives
– Those unable to travel to London are effectively excluded from following proceedings
– The inquiry has made clear that even if people can attend hearings, there may not be space at the venue to accommodate them.

Kate Wilson explained:

“There
are alternatives available that could protect privacy while maintaining
public access. The Inquiry already has experience managing sensitive
evidence through its 10-minute delay system and ‘blurt’ procedures used
for state witnesses. Witnesses could easily be instructed to avoid
naming specific individuals in relation to particular claims. Instead,
the Inquiry has opted for complete closure – a disproportionate approach
that damages the legitimacy of the Inquiry. We hope that this hearing
will be an exercise in real consultation.”

The
loss of live streaming of hearings would compound longstanding concerns
about delays and procedural unfairness. Nine years into the Inquiry,
many undercover officers’ cover names remain unreleased – preventing
those affected from coming forward. While the police are routinely
accommodated for extensions and privacy and anonymity applications,
non-state core participants face inflexible deadlines and late
disclosure causing immense strain on people who have put their lives on
hold waiting for answers and to give their evidence.

ENDS

Notes to editors:

–
The Undercover Policing Inquiry was established in 2015 to examine
undercover police operations in England and Wales since 1968

–
The proposed restrictions affect evidence hearings in weeks commencing
4, 11, 25 November and 2 December 2024. See full programme here: https://www.ucpi.org.uk/2024/09/06/provisional-schedule-for-the-tranche-2-phase-2-hearings/

For more information email:
opposingpolicesurveillance@gmail.com

Campaign Opposing Police Surveillance (COPS):
www.campaignopposingpolicesurveillance.com