The Pitchford inquiry into undercover policing: some lessons from the preliminary hearings

Raphael Schlembach

The Pitchford inquiry into undercover policing: some lessons from the preliminary hearings

Research output: Chapter in Book/Conference proceeding with ISSN or ISBN › Conference contribution with ISSN or ISBN

Abstract

The public inquiry into undercover policing (“the Pitchford inquiry”) commenced in July 2015 and in its first year has considered a range of preliminary issues, including the awarding of core participant status to interested parties. Although the inquiry is perceived broadly as an inquest into undercover policing, it is highly politically charged due its focus on the infiltration of left-wing protest groups by undercover police units. In this paper I reflect on some of the key issues arising from the preliminary hearings and from the remit set by the Home Secretary. In particular, I query whether the inquiry suffers from a legitimacy deficit, due to a number of shortcomings; for example the restriction of the inquiry’s remit to England and Wales only and the police’s resolve to give some of the evidence in private rather than public. This has implications for how non-police core participants will relate to it and how it will be perceived more widely.

Original language	English
Title of host publication	Papers from the British Criminology Conference
Place of Publication	London
Publisher	British Society of Criminology
Pages	0-0
Number of pages	1
Volume	16
Publication status	Published - 16 Oct 2016
Event	Papers from the British Criminology Conference - Nottingham, 6-8 July 2016 Duration: 16 Oct 2016 → …

Publication series

Name	Papers from the British Criminology Conference

Conference

Conference	Papers from the British Criminology Conference
Period	16/10/16 → …

Bibliographical note

Keywords

public inquiry
surveillance
undercover policing
protest
legitimacy

Access to Document

pbcc_2016_Schlembach.pdfFinal published version, 751 KBLicence: Unspecified

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'The Pitchford inquiry into undercover policing: some lessons from the preliminary hearings'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Raphael Schlembach
- R.Schlembach@brighton.ac.uk
Person: Academic

Cite this

@inproceedings{4e4c02be74784522b425c2bb08f60cf5,

title = "The Pitchford inquiry into undercover policing: some lessons from the preliminary hearings",

abstract = "The public inquiry into undercover policing (“the Pitchford inquiry”) commenced in July 2015 and in its first year has considered a range of preliminary issues, including the awarding of core participant status to interested parties. Although the inquiry is perceived broadly as an inquest into undercover policing, it is highly politically charged due its focus on the infiltration of left-wing protest groups by undercover police units. In this paper I reflect on some of the key issues arising from the preliminary hearings and from the remit set by the Home Secretary. In particular, I query whether the inquiry suffers from a legitimacy deficit, due to a number of shortcomings; for example the restriction of the inquiry{\textquoteright}s remit to England and Wales only and the police{\textquoteright}s resolve to give some of the evidence in private rather than public. This has implications for how non-police core participants will relate to it and how it will be perceived more widely.",

keywords = "public inquiry, surveillance, undercover policing, protest, legitimacy",

author = "Raphael Schlembach",

note = "Published in Papers from the British Criminology Conference ISSN 1759-0043.Vol.16 2016. {\textcopyright} 2016 the author and the British Society of Criminology; Papers from the British Criminology Conference ; Conference date: 16-10-2016",

year = "2016",

month = oct,

day = "16",

language = "English",

volume = "16",

series = "Papers from the British Criminology Conference",

publisher = "British Society of Criminology",

pages = "0--0",

booktitle = "Papers from the British Criminology Conference",

}

The Pitchford inquiry into undercover policing: some lessons from the preliminary hearings. / Schlembach, Raphael.

Papers from the British Criminology Conference. Vol. 16 London : British Society of Criminology, 2016. p. 0-0 (Papers from the British Criminology Conference).

Research output: Chapter in Book/Conference proceeding with ISSN or ISBN › Conference contribution with ISSN or ISBN

TY - GEN

T1 - The Pitchford inquiry into undercover policing: some lessons from the preliminary hearings

AU - Schlembach, Raphael

PY - 2016/10/16

Y1 - 2016/10/16

N2 - The public inquiry into undercover policing (“the Pitchford inquiry”) commenced in July 2015 and in its first year has considered a range of preliminary issues, including the awarding of core participant status to interested parties. Although the inquiry is perceived broadly as an inquest into undercover policing, it is highly politically charged due its focus on the infiltration of left-wing protest groups by undercover police units. In this paper I reflect on some of the key issues arising from the preliminary hearings and from the remit set by the Home Secretary. In particular, I query whether the inquiry suffers from a legitimacy deficit, due to a number of shortcomings; for example the restriction of the inquiry’s remit to England and Wales only and the police’s resolve to give some of the evidence in private rather than public. This has implications for how non-police core participants will relate to it and how it will be perceived more widely.

AB - The public inquiry into undercover policing (“the Pitchford inquiry”) commenced in July 2015 and in its first year has considered a range of preliminary issues, including the awarding of core participant status to interested parties. Although the inquiry is perceived broadly as an inquest into undercover policing, it is highly politically charged due its focus on the infiltration of left-wing protest groups by undercover police units. In this paper I reflect on some of the key issues arising from the preliminary hearings and from the remit set by the Home Secretary. In particular, I query whether the inquiry suffers from a legitimacy deficit, due to a number of shortcomings; for example the restriction of the inquiry’s remit to England and Wales only and the police’s resolve to give some of the evidence in private rather than public. This has implications for how non-police core participants will relate to it and how it will be perceived more widely.

KW - public inquiry

KW - surveillance

KW - undercover policing

KW - protest

KW - legitimacy

M3 - Conference contribution with ISSN or ISBN

VL - 16

T3 - Papers from the British Criminology Conference

SP - 0

EP - 0

BT - Papers from the British Criminology Conference

PB - British Society of Criminology

CY - London

T2 - Papers from the British Criminology Conference

Y2 - 16 October 2016

ER -