Victims of #SpyCops & Our Lawyers: What We Really Need from the UnderCover Policing Inquiry, 2020
26 videos • 250 views • by Cops Campaign On Monday 2 November 2020, the Undercover Policing Inquiry began after five years of preliminary work. The opening session is a three week set of hearings, divided into two parts. The first half the presentation of Opening Statements from the core participants. The second the start of the actual hearing of evidence, which we will cover in later posts. For now, we will just look at the Opening Statements and why they are important. A core participant is a person or organisation which has been accepted as having been spied upon by the Inquiry. The Chair has agreed that they have a particular interest in the proceedings, in that they are particularly affected by any outcome, or potentially facing criticism. One of the benefits of being a core participant is that they are consulted on matters and make representations. In theory at least. Many of the Non-Police/ State Core Participants (NPSCPs) feel they are being ignored in favour of the police, something that has caused considerable bitterness (which the Opening Statements will refer to in many places). One benefit of being a core participant is the right to make an opening statement to the Inquiry prior to the beginning of evidential hearings. The purpose of this statement is to set out your case – your expectations and hopes for the Inquiry, or to challenge where it is going wrong. It is also a place where you can make admissions or defend your position if you are expecting criticisms. As such, they are considered to have considerable importance and watched carefully by all involved. However, making an opening statement is not a requirement and some NPSCPs have chosen not to do so, as has spycop Mark Kennedy. A number have not made written submissions but will be making oral ones. We hear from the barristers representing the Inquiry itself, state agencies, undercovers, other parties such as whistleblower Peter Francis, and the families of undercovers. Finally, several days are given over to the NPSCPs, with days focusing on different classes within them, such as women targeted, family justice campaigns, etc. Several NPSCPs who are representing themselves - without lawyers - also speak. UCPI CORE PARTICIPANT CATEGORIES Categories are the groups into which the Inquiry divides core participants. Many NPSCPs would argue they are members of more than one category. For instance, many of the women deceived into relationships also consider themselves first and foremost political campaigners. For ease of use, we set them out below: A: Police B: Government C: Police officers D: Political organisations and politicians E: Trade unions / Blacklist Support Group F: Relatives of deceased individuals G: Family of Stephen Lawrence, Duwayne Brooks & Michael Mansfield, QC H: Individuals in relationships with undercover officers I: Miscarriages of justice J: Justice campaigns K: Political activists L: Social and environmental activists M: Families of police officers The Inquiry’s website has a list of core participants. The Inquiry has published its own introduction to the hearings.