Undercover infiltration is a tactic of political policing, targeting dissent against the status quo, argues Connor Woodman
Over the past year, we have hosted a Research Fellow, Connor Woodman, sponsored by the Barry Amiel & Norman Melburn Trust. The Centre is today publishing two papers on undercover policing Connor has written as part of this Fellowship, under the title Spycops in context.
The 'Spycops in context' papers historicises and analyses the practice of the British secret state, demonstrating how undercover policing has been one tool in a centuries-old apparatus of political policing designed to undermine dissent.
Our Research Fellow, Connor Woodman, has written two articles published in Verso and Jacobin.
For Verso, Connor responds to Alex S Vitale's The End of Policing and asks, 'When, if ever, is it justified for the state to surveil, infiltrate and repress political movements'?
Imran Khan, the Lawrence family solicitor, has written an article in response to the BBC's three-part documentary on Stephen Lawrence's murder, 'Stephen: The Murder That Changed a Nation'.
In The Guardian article, Khan questions whether anything has changed within the Metropolitan Police since Stephen Lawrence's murder in 1993 and emphasises how much work is to be done to shape a racially just society and police force.
Following revelations that undercover police officers infiltrated hundreds of political and justice campaigns in the UK, the government launched an Undercover Policing Inquiry in 2015. Three years later, to cries of ‘no justice, no peace’, dozens of spying victims marched out of the latest Inquiry hearing, denouncing the process and calling for the resignation of presiding judge John Mitting.
Connor Woodman writes about the latest stages of the Undercover Policing Inquiry, following a public hearing earlier this week
Connor Woodman reports on the latest public hearings in the Undercover Policing Inquiry
Three years after the Undercover Policing Inquiry was set up, we still do not know the answer to the most basic of questions about what happened, writes Helen Mills