This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.
You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/undercover-with-paul-lewis-and-rob-evans/2015/jul/17/judge-leading-public-inquiry-into-undercover-police-to-speak-for-the-first-time
The article has changed 3 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
| Version 0 | Version 1 |
|---|---|
| Judge leading public inquiry into undercover police to speak about the inquiry for the first time | |
| (35 minutes later) | |
| The senior judge heading the public inquiry into undercover policing is due to speak for the first time about the future direction of the inquiry. | The senior judge heading the public inquiry into undercover policing is due to speak for the first time about the future direction of the inquiry. |
| Lord Justice Pitchford has said that he will make “some opening remarks” at the high court in London. | Lord Justice Pitchford has said that he will make “some opening remarks” at the high court in London. |
| He said he would talk “about the background to the inquiry, its terms of reference and the process that I intend to adopt.” | He said he would talk “about the background to the inquiry, its terms of reference and the process that I intend to adopt.” |
| He said (here) that he will do this in the next few days, although the date has yet to be made public. The judge added he “shall also be seeking the assistance of persons and institutions that will have a contribution to make to the work of the inquiry”. | He said (here) that he will do this in the next few days, although the date has yet to be made public. The judge added he “shall also be seeking the assistance of persons and institutions that will have a contribution to make to the work of the inquiry”. |
| On Thursday, home secretary Theresa May announced the remit of the inquiry. (It can be found here, along reports with here from the Guardian and here from the BBC). | On Thursday, home secretary Theresa May announced the remit of the inquiry. (It can be found here, along reports with here from the Guardian and here from the BBC). |
| As it stands, the remit is not very specific on what the inquiry will examine (a point made here by the Campaign Opposing Police Surveillance). | As it stands, the remit is not very specific on what the inquiry will examine (a point made here by the Campaign Opposing Police Surveillance). |
| Related: Senior judge to lead inquiry into police spying on political campaigns | Related: Senior judge to lead inquiry into police spying on political campaigns |
| It appears that the official thinking at the moment is that the remit announced by the home secretary would be widely drawn, and that it would be left up to Pitchford to decide what will, and will not, be scrutinised. | It appears that the official thinking at the moment is that the remit announced by the home secretary would be widely drawn, and that it would be left up to Pitchford to decide what will, and will not, be scrutinised. |
| It means that as it stands, it is unclear exactly what will be included in the inquiry, although there may be more answers when Pitchford speaks. | It means that as it stands, it is unclear exactly what will be included in the inquiry, although there may be more answers when Pitchford speaks. |
| Jacqui, the woman who discovered by chance that the father of her son was an undercover police officer, said that in general she was happy with the brief terms of reference for the inquiry, but was waiting to see “whether the police will be allowed to hide behind an anonymity provision before I fully support the inquiry”. Her reaction can be found here. | Jacqui, the woman who discovered by chance that the father of her son was an undercover police officer, said that in general she was happy with the brief terms of reference for the inquiry, but was waiting to see “whether the police will be allowed to hide behind an anonymity provision before I fully support the inquiry”. Her reaction can be found here. |
| A statement from the group of eight women who are suing the Metropolitan police after finding out their one-time boyfriends were undercover officers can be read here. They said the “biggest threat to the credibility of this inquiry” came from the police’s insistence that the identities of the undercover officers must be kept secret. | A statement from the group of eight women who are suing the Metropolitan police after finding out their one-time boyfriends were undercover officers can be read here. They said the “biggest threat to the credibility of this inquiry” came from the police’s insistence that the identities of the undercover officers must be kept secret. |
| The police’s stance on secrecy was challenged this week by Doreen Lawrence, whose family was spied on after the racist killing of her son Stephen. She has called for undercover officers to be identified. | The police’s stance on secrecy was challenged this week by Doreen Lawrence, whose family was spied on after the racist killing of her son Stephen. She has called for undercover officers to be identified. |
| Neville Lawrence, Stephen’s father, told Channel 4 News (here) on Thursday that he wanted to find out “who authorised the undercover police officers to come into my house, what information did they gather, the name of the officer who actually started spying on my family.” | Neville Lawrence, Stephen’s father, told Channel 4 News (here) on Thursday that he wanted to find out “who authorised the undercover police officers to come into my house, what information did they gather, the name of the officer who actually started spying on my family.” |
| Peter Francis, the former undercover officer who is now a whistle-blower, said (here) he fully supported the call for the spies and their managers to appear before the inquiry “voluntarily or indeed otherwise, and in the open.” | Peter Francis, the former undercover officer who is now a whistle-blower, said (here) he fully supported the call for the spies and their managers to appear before the inquiry “voluntarily or indeed otherwise, and in the open.” |
| The Monitoring Project, which has helped many grieving families in their campaigns for justice, welcomed (here) “the spirit and substance” of the remit that allows the judge “to conduct a thorough, robust, wide-ranging and as far-reaching an investigation as possible”. The undercover spies gathered intelligence on at least 18 families fighting to get justice from the police. | |
| Trade unions and blacklisted workers are pushing for allegations that they were monitored to be heard by the inquiry (a point echoed here by the National Union of Journalists). | |
| Jon Boutcher, the police chief responsible for undercover operations, promised (here) that the police will co-operate “fully” with the inquiry. | Jon Boutcher, the police chief responsible for undercover operations, promised (here) that the police will co-operate “fully” with the inquiry. |
| Meanwhile Police Spies out of Lives, the group supporting the eight women suing the police, has launched a petition calling for the public inquiry to be “transparent, robust and comprehensive”. The online petition on the 38 degrees website can be read here. | Meanwhile Police Spies out of Lives, the group supporting the eight women suing the police, has launched a petition calling for the public inquiry to be “transparent, robust and comprehensive”. The online petition on the 38 degrees website can be read here. |