Difference between revisions of "EN52"
Peter Salmon (talk | contribs) |
Peter Salmon (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
==In the Undercover Policing Inquiry== | ==In the Undercover Policing Inquiry== | ||
| − | * 15 November 2018: Mitting wrote:<ref name="mitting.npoiu.mindedto3"/> | + | * 15 November 2018: the inquiry indicated that it was minded to reject the application to restrict EN31's real name, with a closed hearing to take place late 2018.<ref name="gray.ucpi.npoiu.explan.note3"/> Mitting wrote:<ref name="mitting.npoiu.mindedto3"/> |
:: Between 2005 and 2006, while seconded to the National Public Order Intelligence Unit, EN52 was a cover officer for an undercover officer. The legitimacy of the deployment was questionable and it was unsuccessful. EN52 has valuable evidence to give about this deployment and its justification. After the return of EN52 to the Metropolitan Police Service EN52 played a significant part in the winding up of the Special Demonstration Squad and has valuable evidence to give about that too. There is no threat to the safety of EN52. There will undoubtedly be great interest from the traditional and non-traditional media in the evidence of EN52. It is also likely that determined efforts will be made to discover the whereabouts of EN52. This will interfere with the right to respect for private and family life under Article 8 of the European Convention. The interference should be transient and have no lasting impact. Care will have to be taken with the evidence to be given by EN52 and protective measures are likely to be required, for reasons explained in the closed note which accompanies these reasons. Subject to that, the public interest requires that EN52 should give evidence about matters of significant public interest in the real name of EN52. | :: Between 2005 and 2006, while seconded to the National Public Order Intelligence Unit, EN52 was a cover officer for an undercover officer. The legitimacy of the deployment was questionable and it was unsuccessful. EN52 has valuable evidence to give about this deployment and its justification. After the return of EN52 to the Metropolitan Police Service EN52 played a significant part in the winding up of the Special Demonstration Squad and has valuable evidence to give about that too. There is no threat to the safety of EN52. There will undoubtedly be great interest from the traditional and non-traditional media in the evidence of EN52. It is also likely that determined efforts will be made to discover the whereabouts of EN52. This will interfere with the right to respect for private and family life under Article 8 of the European Convention. The interference should be transient and have no lasting impact. Care will have to be taken with the evidence to be given by EN52 and protective measures are likely to be required, for reasons explained in the closed note which accompanies these reasons. Subject to that, the public interest requires that EN52 should give evidence about matters of significant public interest in the real name of EN52. | ||
==Notes== | ==Notes== | ||
<references /> | <references /> | ||
Latest revision as of 15:31, 2 January 2019
This article is part of the Undercover Research Portal at Powerbase - investigating corporate and police spying on activists
EN52 is the cipher given to a Metropolitan Police officer seconded to the National Public Order Intelligence Unit who was a cover officer for an unsuccessful and questionable deployment of an undercover. They subsequently played a role in the winding up of the Special Demonstration Squad in 2007-2008. The Undercover Policing Inquiry has indicated it will publish EN52's real namename.[1][2]
For the N cipher system see N officers page.
In the Undercover Policing Inquiry
- 15 November 2018: the inquiry indicated that it was minded to reject the application to restrict EN31's real name, with a closed hearing to take place late 2018.[2] Mitting wrote:[1]
- Between 2005 and 2006, while seconded to the National Public Order Intelligence Unit, EN52 was a cover officer for an undercover officer. The legitimacy of the deployment was questionable and it was unsuccessful. EN52 has valuable evidence to give about this deployment and its justification. After the return of EN52 to the Metropolitan Police Service EN52 played a significant part in the winding up of the Special Demonstration Squad and has valuable evidence to give about that too. There is no threat to the safety of EN52. There will undoubtedly be great interest from the traditional and non-traditional media in the evidence of EN52. It is also likely that determined efforts will be made to discover the whereabouts of EN52. This will interfere with the right to respect for private and family life under Article 8 of the European Convention. The interference should be transient and have no lasting impact. Care will have to be taken with the evidence to be given by EN52 and protective measures are likely to be required, for reasons explained in the closed note which accompanies these reasons. Subject to that, the public interest requires that EN52 should give evidence about matters of significant public interest in the real name of EN52.
Notes
- ↑ 1.0 1.1 Sir John Mitting, In the matter of section 19(3) of the Inquiries Act 2005. Applications for restriction orders in respect of the real and cover names of officers of the National Public Order Intelligence Unit and its predecessor/successor units 'Minded to' Note 3, Undercover Policing Inquiry, 15 November 2018.
- ↑ 2.0 2.1 Steven Gray, Counsel to the Inquiry's Explanatory Note to accompany the third 'Minded To' note in respect of applications for restriction orders over the real and cover names of officers of the National Public Order Intelligence Unit and its predecessor/successor units, Undercover Policing Inquiry, 15 November 2018.
