EN40

This article is part of the Undercover Research Portal at Powerbase - investigating corporate and police spying on activists

---

Part of a series on National Public Order Intelligence Unit
'EN40'
Alias:	unknown
Deployment:	unknown
Role:	undercover

EN40 is the cipher given to a former undercover officer of the National Public Order Intelligence Unit who was deployed in the 2000s against unknown targets. Since leaving the NPOIU they remain a police officer working undercover for other operations. Sir John Mitting, chair of the Undercover Policing Inquiry, has ruled that the Inquiry will restrict the officers real and cover name in the Inquiry.

• For the EN cipher system see EN officers page.

As a police officer

Their secondment to the NPOIU was the first time the officer held an undercover role; they were undercover for a number of years. Image of them taken during this time could possibly identify him. They have also stated:

I have not engaged in any of the illegitimate activities that the Inquiry was formed to investigate. I did not engage in intimate sexual liaisons with any individual and I behaved with integrity and professionalism at all times.

Although I cannot recall whether I received an oral or written guarantee that my real or cover identities would not be disclosed, it is self-evident that I would have not engaged in undercover work if I thought for one moment that my identity could be disclosed and that I and my family would be placed at this level of risk. The work that I undertook for the NPOIU was to provide intelligence; not evidence. We were never in any doubt that the security and safety of undercover officers was paramount and that an operation would have been terminated if there was a risk that we would have been discovered. The NPOIU took every possible precaution to protect our identities from being revealed.

According to their witness statement, EN40 has been 'deployed undercover in drugs, firearms & homicide investigations, including against a number of extremely violent targets. Thus they would have to go into witness protection if their identity was disclosed as they are at risk from deployments carried out post-NPOIU, and there would also be risk to other undercovers and members of the public.

In the Undercover Policing Inquiry

• 2 May 2018: Mitting minded to restrict real and cover names, writing:

EN40 is a serving police officer who performs undercover duties. Disclosure of the real or cover name would undermine the ability of EN40 to discharge those duties. It would not be in the public interest for that to occur. Disclosure of the real or cover name would, for reasons which are explained in the closed note which accompanies these reasons, put the safety of EN40 at risk.

• 9 July 2018: Inquiry releases gisted versions of the restriction order application, witness statement and risk assessment for the officer and Mitting directed that any submissions in response to these applications were to be made by 20 July 2018.

• 30 Oct 2018: Mitting rules to restrict both real and cover names, writing:

I remain satisfied that the publication of EN40's cover name in the context of an National Public Order Intelligence Unit deployment would put safety at risk from individuals associated with other deployments. I do not accept the suggestion that EN40 is in a position no different from that of an undercover police officer assisting in the investigation and ultimate arrest and prosecution of those charged with serious offences. In the event that the participation of such an officer in the investigation was required to be revealed to the trial judge and/or to the defence, carefully tailored steps would be ta ken to ensure that the officer's true identity w as protected. Disclosure of EN40's cover name would be likely to stimulate a determined effort by activist researchers to publish information about EN 40 and/or to discover the true identity of EN40. The risks to EN40 would be uncontrolled.