THE Scottish Government should initiate its own public inquiry into undercover policing, key participants in the UK Government’s probe into the practice have said.
The Pitchford Inquiry was set up in England and Wales to investigate allegations of misconduct by undercover officers.
It is claimed undercover Metropolitan Police officers were also involved in spying in Scotland, but the UK Government has refused to extend the inquiry north of the Border.
A total of 24 “core participants” from Pitchford, who say they were also targeted by undercover police in Scotland, have signed a statement calling for a separate Scottish inquiry to take place.
Three of them – Merrick Cork, Jason Kirkpatrick and Donal O’Driscoll – have written to Justice Secretary Michael Matheson outlining their case.
They say the Scottish Government’s proposals for a “strategic review” of undercover policing by Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary in Scotland (HMICS) are unacceptable.
The core participants – who have the right to legal representation and to question witnesses at the Pitchford Inquiry – said previous HMICS investigations had failed to expose the truth, while there are also concerns about conflict of interest.
They wrote: “It was extremely frustrating to learn of the unacceptable compromise solution taken by the Scottish Government to instead simply ask HMICS to undertake a ‘strategic review’ of undercover policing in Scotland.
“We sincerely request not a ‘review’ of undercover policing done by the HMICS, but a fully transparent inquiry done in Scotland with terms of reference similar to that of the Pitchford Inquiry.”
They also suggested the exclusion of Scotland from Pitchford could be the subject of legal action.
“We would also like to inform you that in Northern Ireland, which is in a similar situation to Scotland regarding exclusion from the Pitchford Inquiry, there has already been a first hearing in court for efforts to conduct a judicial review of Northern Ireland’s exclusion from the Inquiry,” they wrote.
“The exclusion of Scotland should also be subject to judicial review.”
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here