Main story:
Eight women are applying to the High Court on Thursday 5 June and Friday 6 June 2014 to require the Metropolitan police to drop their 'neither confirm nor deny' (NCND) stance in a case being brought against them over undercover relationships.
In a court hearing that appears to be ignored by the mainstream media, the eight women are suing the force for assault, deceit, negligence and misfeasance in public office, after being deceived into intimate relationships with five different undercover officers. The officers were infiltrating environmental and social justice campaign groups, and the relationships span a period of over 20 years.
In a joint statement the eight said: "The purpose of our application is to request that the Court bring an end to the obstructive and distressing approach taken by the police, and require them to plead a proper defence to the claims. If permitted, the police will continue to use Neither Confirm Nor Deny to cover up the abusive, unlawful and unethical nature of
their operations."
A statement released by their legal team said: "Despite the case being initiated in December 2011 the police have so far refused to properly plead their case, filing a defence which largely states that they refuse to confirm or deny any of the factual matters in the claim. In challenging these obstructive tactics by the police, the women will provide evidence to show that the Met is using NCND as a cover to hide serious wrongdoing, and will seek an order for the police to provide disclosure and properly respond to these claims."
Harriet Wistrich, the women’s solicitor, said: "We are making an application that the police must file a proper defence, in accordance with the civil procedure rules by which the defendant has to admit, not admit or deny each and every fact that you assert. To simply assert a policy of 'neither confirm nor deny' is not complying with the requirements of the civil procedure rules.
"Three years on and we still don’t have any answers. The police must be made to answer the allegations. Ever since the deception started the police have sought to maintain their deception at any cost - including the psychological harm to the women who have been left not knowing the truth about these operations."
1. Full background information on the case can be found here: http://policespiesoutoflives.org.uk/the-case-overview/
2. The hearing will also concern the common law claims of five of the eight women.
3. Further background on this hearing is at http://policespiesoutoflives.potager.org/ncnd-5-6-jun/ Delaying tactics from the police included a strike-out claim on the basis of NCND – which was dropped at the last minute in March of this year. Two large files of evidence were submitted to the Court by the women’s lawyers to counter the strike out claim. These files detailed instances where the police had confirmed the identities of undercover officers; commented on operational tactics of these political policing units; show the identities of the undercover officers reported in the media; and where the women had meticulously compiled evidence demonstrating that they can show the true identities of the officers.
4. Further background on NCND can be found at: http://policespiesoutoflives.org.uk/the-case-overview/legal-battles/neither-confirm-nor-deny/