EN officers

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

---

Part of a series on the Undercover Policing Inquiry
N Officers list
Description:	A list of N & EN cyphers used to designate individual officers in the Undercover Policing Inquiry and by Operation Elter

Officers of the National Public Order Intelligence Unit (NPOIU) are for the purposes of the Undercover Policing Inquiry designated by the cipher EN. Officers were in early parts of the process simply designated by N followed by a number. As the number of officers grew, this changed to HN for those officers of the Special Demonstration Squad, the H representing Operation Herne, the corresponding police investigation. As the role of the NPOIU officers in the Undercover Policing Inquiry was taken on by the National Police Chief Council's Operation Elter, the EN cipher was adopted for them. For more details see under [N officers].

This page lists the known EN numbers and material relating to them. Separate pages have been provided for the HN numbers.

Updated January 2019.

Cypher	Name (italics for cover name only)	Position	Notes
EN1	Marco Jacobs	undercover	Deployed 2004-2009. Real name restricted. Had sexual relationships.
EN26	likely to come	unknown	Minded to refuse application to restrict real name with closed hearing on this to take place in late 2018. Reasons set out in closed note.
EN28	unknown	cover officer	Application to restrict real name refused. Cover officer for ARNI & NPOIU.
EN29	restricted	cover officer	Real name will be restricted due to risk arising out of subsequent undercover work into serious crimed. Briefly deployed in a minor role as undercover, the cover name for which will not be released.
EN30	restricted	cover officer	Cover officer for over six years, including deployments of interest to the Inquiry. Real name will be restricted.
EN31	likely to come	cover officer	Cover officer for approximately six years, including for Mark Kennedy and EN34 Application to restrict real name refused.
EN32	Rod Richardson	Undercover	Real name will be restricted. Also given as N596.
EN33	restricted	undercover	Deployed in early years of NPOIU to groups that pose a 'real risk' to the officer. Mitting minded to restrict real and cover names, writting: "Although it would be desirable for members of the targeted groups to know the cover name of EN33, so as to be in a position to provide and give evidence about the deployments, that is not possible without a disproportionate and unjustified interference with the right to respect for the private and family life of EN33. It is desirable that EN33 should give evidence in public about the deployments, in which event precautionary measures will be required to preserve anonymity and it is unlikely that the whole of the evidence which can be provided by EN33 can be given in public, even with precautionary measures in place."
EN34	Lynn Watson	undercover	Deployed into various groups 2003-2008. Real name restricted.
EN36	restricted	undercover	Mitting minded to restrict real and cover names, writing: "EN36 belonged to the [NPOIU] for a short period in the mid-2000s. EN36 was engaged in legend building and established links with a group whose members almost certainly posed and pose no threat to the safety of EN36. EN36 has potentially significant evidence to give about the management of the [NPOIU], if at all possible in public. If so, protective measures will be required. EN36 is a serving police officer and has been deployed, undercover, in circumstances which give rise to a real threat to life and limb..."
EN38	restricted	undercover	Mitting minded to restrict real and cover names, writing: "EN38 is a serving police officer. EN38 was deployed into one group over several years by the National Public Order Intelligence Unit and reported on others. Members and associates of the group posed and still pose a real risk to safety. Publication of the cover name of EN38 might lead to the identification of the real name, in which case the risks would materialise. I am not prepared to run those risks.... Further, the ability of EN38 to fulfil valuable current police duties might be impaired by publication. It is not in the public interest to run that risk."
EN38	restricted	undercover	Mitting minded to restrict real and cover names, writing: "Full reasons for the decision which I am minded to make are set out in a closed note. They cannot be made public. They include the fact that EN39 is a serving officer who has been and can be deployed as an undercover officer since the closure of the National Public Order Intelligence Unit. It would not be in the public interest to publish anything which might reveal EN39's real or cover identity."
EN40	restricted	undercover	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."
EN40	restricted	Undercover	Mitting minded to restrict real and cover names, writing: "EN41 is a serving police officer who performs undercover duties. Disclosure of the real or cover name would undermine the ability of EN41 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, also put the safety of EN41 at risk.... Although disclosure of the cover name w ould be likely to prompt evidence from others who may have encountered EN41, it would amount to a disproportionate interference w ith that right and would not be j ustified under Article 8(2) of the European Convention."
EN42	unknown	undercover	Mitting minded to restrict real and cover names, writing: "EN42 is a serving police officer w ho has performed and continues to perform undercover duties. Some of the deployments have created a real risk to the safety of EN42. Further, disclosure of the real or cover name might imperil the safety of others and would be likely to impair the ability of EN42 to discharge undercover duties in the future. It is not in the public interest that either should occur.... Although no risk assessment has been prepared, from what I know it is unlikely that any member of the target groups against which EN42 was deployed by the National Public Order Intelligence Unit in the 2000s poses a real risk to the safety of EN42. It is desirable that the evidence of EN42 about their deployment is provided or given in public, if that can be done without compromising anonymity. Careful thought, and a risk assessment, is required before any final decision can be made about the manner in which the evidence of EN42 is to be received. " Mentioned at a court hearing of 25 January 2019 (into Judicial Reviews relating to the Inquiry) that the application for anonymity was under review due to new (unknown) information having emerged.
EN43	restricted	undercover	Mitting minded to restrict real and cover names, writing: EN43 was seconded to the National Public Order Intelligence Unit in the last years of its existence. Before and after that time EN43 was deployed by different police bodies in both criminal and non-criminal fields and is still employed by a provincial police force in a covert role. Some of the deployments have exposed EN43 to danger. Publication of the real name would create some risk to the safety of EN43. Publication of the cover name adopted by EN43 during EN43's secondment to the National Public Order Intell igence Unit would impair performance of current and future duties in the undercover field and may also put safety at risk. It would not be in the public interest to publish either. Further, publication would interfere with an element of the right to respect for private and family life of EN43 - physical integrity -and would not be proportionate or justified..."
EN47	restricted	undercover	Mitting minded to restrict real and cover names, writing: EN47 is a serving police officer undertaking valuable undercover duties. For reasons explained in the closed note which accompanies th is note, publication of the real or cover name of EN47 would put at risk the ability of EN47 to perform those duties. It is not in the public interest that that risk should be run.
EN48	restricted	undercover	Mitting minded to restrict real and cover names, writing: EN48 was deployed by the National Public Order Intelligence Unit in the 2000s. Members and associates of the target groups posed and pose a real risk to the safety of EN48. Article 3 of the European Convention is not engaged, because the risk is contingent not immediate, but the right to respect for the private and family life of EN48 under Article 8 would be infringed in that and other respects. Although publication of the cover name might prompt evidence from others who encountered EN48, it would amount to a disproportionate interference with that right and would not be justified under Article 8(2).
EN49	resticted	cover officer	Cover name will be resitricted. Cover officer for majority of NPOIU's existance "principally for two undercover officers, one of whose cover names I have refused to restrict. Before then EN49 performed duties which, if disclosed, would give rise to a risk to life. The risk of that happening is not high, but it cannot be run. For that reason, a restriction order in respect of the real name of EN49 must be made".
EN50	likely to come	cover officer	Minded to release real name with closed hearing on this to be held in late 2018. Cover officer for NPOIU "towards the end of it existence. The undercover officer for whom EN50 was the cover officer was deployed for a short time into a group whose members pose no threat to the safety of EN50. EN50 can give evidence about the discharge of this duty and about the discharge of his/her duties generally and the management of the undercover unit in his/her real name without putting his/her safety at risk. There is likely to be some passing interest on the part of the traditional and non-traditional media in EN50's evidence, insufficient to cause any significant interference in his/her right and that of EN50's family to respect for their private and family life under Article 8 of the European Convention. EN50's own concerns about the impact on both safety and private and family life are not objectively justified."
EN51	resticted	cover officer	Real name will be restricted. Cover officer for NPOIU "in the last years of its existence. The evidence which EN51 can give about the discharge of those duties is likely to be of significant interest to the Inquiry. But for the factor referred to below I would have required the evidence to be given in the real name of EN51, without protective measures. 20. Other duties performed by EN51 for police bodies other than the National Public Order Intelligence Unit did give rise to a real risk to life and physical safety. Those risks remain. Whether or not Articles 2 and 3 of the European Convention are engaged, they must not be run. Even if the risks fall to be assessed under Article 8, running them would not be justified under Article 8(2)."
EN52	likely to come	cover officer	Seconded 2005-2006 to NPOIU where cover officer for an unsuccessful and questionable undercover deployment; also involved in the winding up of the SDS.
EN53	resticted	cover officer	Real name will be restricted. Seconded NPOIU 2009-2011, where cover officer for two undercovers. Mitting wrote: "For reasons explained in the open and closed 'Minded to' note dated 2 May 2018, I am minded to make restriction orders in respect of both the real and cover names of both officers. The risk posed by members of the targeted groups to the safety of EN53 is negligible. However, other police duties,performed outside the National Public Order Intelligence Unit have given rise to risks to safety , which cannot be precisely quantified, but remain. Those risks are explained in the closed note which accompanies these reasons. Further, publication of the real name of EN53 would interfere with the current and future performance of work by EN53 which it is not in the public interest to interrupt. To do so would also amount to a disproportionate interference in the right of EN53 to respect for aspects of private life - physical integrity and the ability to perform useful paid work - which would not be justified under Article 8(2) of the European Convention. Careful thought will need to be given about the manner in which the evidence of EN53 and the two undercover officers is to be provided or given."
EN54	likely to come	Temporary head of undercover operations 2003-2004.	Minded to refuse application to restrict real name with closed hearing on this to take place in late 2018. Temporary head for nine months. Mitting wrote: "With one possible exception, no threat to EN54's physical safety arising from the performance of these duties has been identified. For reasons explained in the closed note which accompanies these reasons, I am unconvinced that even the possible exception gives rise to a real risk to EN54's physical safety. The evidence which EN54 may be able to give about the discharge of his/her duties for the National Public Order Intelligence Unit islikely to attract the attention of traditional and non-traditi onal media and is likely to interfere, for a short period, with EN54's right and that of his/her family to respect for their private and family life under Article 8 of the European Convention. I am not persuaded that there is any greater risk of interference by others. The risk assessor has drawn attention to the "Contrainfo" post referred to in the case of EN31 above. I do not believe that this gives rise to any greater risk to EN54 than it does EN31. I am satisfied that the need for a public official performing a significant managerial role in one of the units under specific investigation to give evidence publicly in his/her own name about the discharge of those duties justifies any interference in his/her right to respect for private and family life under Article 8(2)."
EN74	restricted	undercover	Mitting minded to restrict real and cover names, writing: EN74 w as an undercover police officer and was deployed by the [NPOIU] in the 2000s. Other duties gave rise to a real risk to life and limb which, to an extent which cannot be precisely quantified, remains. Publication of the real or cover name would increase those risks. The risks are contingent, not immediate, and so engage Article 8 of the European Convention, not Articles 2 and 3. Publication of t he cover name of EN74 might lead to identification of the real name, in which case the risks w ould material ise. It is not necessary to fulfil the terms of reference of the Inquiry to run those risks.
EN287	DCI Richard May	NDEU manager	No cover name; restriction order application over real name refused, Mitting writing: In the course of a 30-year police career, which ended in 2013, EN287 was a Detective Chief Inspector seconded to the National Domestic Extremism Unit, the successor unit to the [NPOIU]. He had a managerial role. He played a part in the invest igation by Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Constabulary into the activities of Mark Kennedy. In this context , he w as identified in a Guardian article on 8 November 2012. None of these activities put him or his family at risk of harm or of anything more than passing media interest. This may be unw elcome to him and them, but is outweighed by the legitimate interest which the public has in his performance of his duty in a senior and responsible public office. In respect of this office, the starting presumption that evidence given by such a person about such duties should be given in his own name is not displaced. The Guardian article of 8 Nov 2012.
EN291	restricted	Authorising officer, not with NPIOU	Application to restrict real name granted. Mitting wrote: EN291 was not seconded to the [NPOIU], but did write authorisations under the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 for the deployment of EN327 (HN66) and performed cover officer duties for EN32 and EN508 in 2002-03. EN291 was not deployed as an undercover officer. There is no risk to EN291's safety from those encountered by the three undercover officers. There is some risk of unwelcome attention from traditional and nontraditional media. EN291 was diagnoed by Dr. Busuttil in April 2017 as suffering from a chronicmental illness for a number of years which required treatment. "In his opinion disclosure of EN291's true identity would exacerbate his/her chronic mental ill ness and may increase the risk of suicidal ideation. I have asked for confirmation that, as of September 2018, the position remains unchanged. It is not necessary to permit the Inquiry to fulfil its terms of reference that the evidence which EN291 can provide is given under his/her real name. EN291 will give evidence in public, albeit under his/her cypher. EN291's duties for the National Public Order Intelligence Unit did not require him/her to interact with any member of the public. Publication of EN291's real name would not, therefore, prompt any evidence from them. In those circumstances, the interference in EN29's right to respect for his/her private and family life under Article 8 of the European Convention would not be justified under Article 8(2).
EN407	Likely to come	cover officer	Minded to refuse application to restrict real name with closed hearing on this to take place in late 2018. Mitting wrote: EN407 acted as a cover officer for EN34 ("Lynn Watson") in 2002 and 2003. Publication of EN407's real name would not give rise to any risk to his or her safety arising from those duties. Nor would it give rise to risks to EN407's safety arising from other police duties performed by EN407 during his/ her police career. Publication of EN407's real name will undoubtedly give rise to transient in terest from traditional and non-traditional media, which will be unwelcome to EN407. The limited interference with EN407's right and that of his/her family to respect for their private and family life is a price which must be paid to permit EN34's deployment and its management to be publicly scrutinised. It is justified under Article 8(2) of the European Convention . I am satisfied that the risk of any other form of intrusion is negligible.
EN506	restricted	unknown	Application to restrict real name refused. Mitting wrote: EN506 performed a necessary and important administrative duty in relation to the deployment of EN40, which gives rise to no risk to the safety of EN506. EN506 is a serving police officer w ho has performed duties which, if the real name were to be disclosed, would give rise to real risks to life and limb. Further, EN506 continues to perform valuable police duties which would be compromised if the real name were to be disclosed. It is not in the public interest that should happen. Further,even if Articles 2 and 3 of the European Convention are not engaged (an issue upon which it is not necessary to rule) , Article 8 is. Interference with the right of EN506 to respect for an aspect of private and family life - physical integrity - would not be justified under Article 8(2).
EN508	cover name to come	undercover	Application to restrict cover name refused; real name will be restricted. Deployed 2002-2004 into a number of groups on intermittent basis, none of the member of which pose a 'real risk' to the safety of EN508. Mitting wrote: "There is a strong sterile corridor between cover and real name. Even if it were to be breached, the worst likely consequence is unwelcome, but transient, attention from traditional and non-traditional media. It is possible that publication of the cover name might prompt worthwhile evidence from those encountered by EN508. The limited interference with the right to respect for private and family life, if any, which publication of the cover name might cause is justified by the need to take the opportunityto try to obtain such evidence. There is no need to expose EN508 to media attention or to risk more serious intrusions into private life by publishing the real name. Such interference would not be justified under Article 8(2) of the European Convention.