header-logo header-logo

04 June 2020 / Mike Schwarz
Issue: 7889 / Categories: Opinion , Criminal , Human rights
printer mail-detail

The truth, the whole truth & nothing but the truth

21877
Five years on from its establishment, Mike Schwarz reflects on the Undercover Policing Inquiry

In 2014 the then home secretary, Teresa May, announced the establishment of a public inquiry into undercover policing over the past 50 years. It followed the exposure of ‘appalling practices in undercover policing’ highlighted in one of the many official ‘reviews’ of undercover policing which preceded the announcement.

One year later, at the first hearing of the Inquiry, the then Chair of the Inquiry, Sir Christopher Pitchford made his opening remarks. By the standards of a former senior judge, they brimmed with optimism, enthusiasm, energy. The overarching aim of the Inquiry, as the strapline on its current website proclaims, is ‘getting to the truth of undercover policing and providing recommendations for the future’.

That was in July 2015. Now seems a good time to reflect and take stock.

 

Five years, five points to make

 

First, timing. The whole Inquiry was due to be wrapped up in three

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Gateley Legal—Caroline Pope & Bob Maynard

Gateley Legal—Caroline Pope & Bob Maynard

Construction team bolstered by hire of senior consultant duo

Switalskis—four appointments

Switalskis—four appointments

Firm expands residential conveyancing team with quadruple appointment

mfg Solicitors—Claire Pope

mfg Solicitors—Claire Pope

Private client team welcomes senior associatein Worcester

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll