HN53
This article is part of the Undercover Research Portal at Powerbase - investigating corporate and police spying on activists
HN53 / N53 is the cipher given to a former undercover officer with the Special Demonstration Squad who was deployed undercover in the 1980s. They were later second in operational command of the SDS 1998-2005. The chair of the Undercover Policing Inquiry, John Mitting, has indicated he is minded to restrict both HN53's real and cover names.
- For details of the N-numbers cipher system see the N officers page.
As an SDS undercover
Authored a series of internal memos in 2002 in relation to a joint operation with the National Criminal Intelligence Service known as Op. Wisdom - in relation to the use of the 'Jackal run' process of using a deceased person's identity to obtain passports. According to Operation Herne: 'N53 explained that he believed that between 1968 and 2002 there had been one hundred and two (102) SDS officers who had been provided with covert identities. N53’s documentation stated that the majority of these UCO’s would have used a deceased child’s identity.' (Herne I, 5.4 & 6.2).[1]
Mentioned as an ex-SDS Det. Insp. in relation to material being passed onto other units: N53, another ex-Det. Insp., told Herne: "The SDS retained nothing that would betray its identity" (Ellison, p. 201).[2]
Briefly mentioned in relation to computerisation of SDS / Special Branch records circa 1998 (Herne II, 13.1).[3]
In the Undercover Policing Inquiry
- Jan 2018: more time granted 'to provide the Chairman with information in order for him to make a decision'.[4][5]
- May 2018, Mitting indicated he was minded to restrict HN53's real and cover names in the Inquiry,[6] stating:
- HN53 was second in operational command of the SOS from 1998 -2005. His evidence is of significant importance to he Inquiry and must be given in public,albeit with protective measures taken, to protect his identity. He was also deployed as an undercover officer in the 1980s, in circumstances which are also of interest to the Inquiry. None of the members of the group against which he was deployed pose any threat to his safety. Nevertheless, if his identity were to be made public, there would be significant damage to the public interest and his safety would be put at real risk. Articles 2 and 3 ECHR may not be engaged, because the risk is contingent, not immediate, but Article 8 is. Publication of his real name would interfere with at least one aspect of his right to private life - his physical integrity and would not be justified under Article 8 (2). The risk created by publication of his cover name, when deployed, is less, but still cannot be run, for the same reasons.
- A closed note accompanies these reasons.
Notes
- ↑ Mick Creedon, Operation Herne Report 1: Covert Identities, Metropolitan Police Service, July 2013.
- ↑ Mark Ellison, Possible corruption and the role of undercover policing in the Stephen Lawrence case, Stephen Lawrence Independent Review, Vol. 1, Gov.UK, March 2014
- ↑ Mick Creedon, Operation Herne: Report 2 - Allegations of Peter Francis, Metropolitan Police Service, March 2014.
- ↑ Press Notice: Decisions relating to anonymity applications: Special Demonstration Squad, Undercover Policing Inquiry, 25 January 2018.
- ↑ 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 Special Operations Squad and Special Demonstration Squad - 'Minded To' Note 4, Undercover Policing Inquiry, 25 January 2018.
- ↑ 'Minded to' decisions relating to anonymity applications: Special Demonstration Squad Ruling on HN122, Undercover Policing Inquiry, 23 May 2018.
