Petition Of Matilda Gifford For Judicial Review
| Jurisdiction | Scotland |
| Judge | Lady Carmichael |
| Neutral Citation | [2018] CSOH 108 |
| Date | 21 November 2018 |
| Docket Number | P1032/16 |
| Court | Court of Session |
| Published date | 21 November 2018 |
OUTER HOUSE, COURT OF SESSION
[2018] CSOH 108
P1032/16
OPINION OF LADY CARMICHAEL
In the Petition of
MATILDA GIFFORD
Petitioner
for
Judicial Review
Petitioner: O’Neill QC; Balfour + Manson LLP
First Respondent: Webster; Office of the Advocate General
Second Respondent: O’Neill (sol adv); Scottish Government Legal Dir ectorate
21 November 2018
Introduction
[1] The petitioner avers that she is an environmental campaigner and activist associated
with a group, Plane Stupid, which campaigns and protests against climate change and
environmental degradation associated with air transport. Her petition challenges two
decisions. One is a decision of the United Kingdom government refusing to amend the
terms of reference of the Mitting inquiry into undercover policing (“the UCPI”) so as to
cover the activities of English police forces in Scotland and the activities of Scottish police
forces. The second decision is a decision of the Scottish Government not to direct that there
be a public inquiry in relation to these matters.
2
[2] The petitioner avers that she is directly affected by each of these decisions as she, and
the group Plane Stupid with which she has been associated, were the victims of undercover
policing in Scotland. Her petition relates that she was arrested in 2009 following a protest
at Aberdeen Airport and that Plane Stupid was infiltrated by police after that protest, and
that police officers from Strathclyde Police were deployed as undercover agents to spy on
activist groups including Plane Stupid. She says that she does not yet know the full scale of
this undercover police activity directed against her (amongst others) and separately against
Plane Stupid and other activist groups, and that, therefore an independent inquiry into
undercover policing is required.
[3] The petitioner’s pleadings regarding her own involvement with undercover police
operatives are lengthy, and I summarise them here.
When she was on bail after her arrest in 2009 she was charged with a further
offence of housebreaking with intent to steal, and was held in custody over a
weekend. While she was held she was questioned about her membership of
Plane Stupid and about how the group functioned.
She returned to the police office afterwards to pick up keys which had not been
returned to her when she was released, and when she did so she was invited in
for a “chat” with two individuals who tried to obtain her assistance as an
informant as to the activities of Plane Stupid.
A further two meetings took place between the petitioner and these individuals,
in which they made further attempts to obtain her assistance and hinted that she
would be paid for information. The petitioner recorded the meetings. The
recordings and transcripts were published by the Guardian newspaper.
3
One of the individuals met the petitioner briefly in the street and told the
petitioner that if she did not cooperate in providing information she might later
find herself in prison.
The petitioner made a subject access request in relation to her meetings with
these individuals. This was successful to the extent that Strathclyde Police
confirmed that the individuals were both officers in that force and on duty at the
material times. The petitioner had also asked whether Strathclyde Police had
any officers working with them who were employed by other agencies or police
forces in the UK such as the security services.
Mark Kennedy, then calling himself Mark Stone, an individual whose activities
have become the subject of a great deal of publicity, and which are to be
investigated by the UCPI, attended an activists’ workshop held by the petitioner
and organised by Plane Stupid in August 2010. The purpose of the workshop
was “how to resist police infiltration”.
[4] The petitioner makes various other averments about the activities of London-based
undercover operatives in Scotland, and refers to findings in the HM Inspector of
Constabulary(“HMIC”) publication A Review of national police units which provide intelligence
on criminality associated with protest (February 2012) relating to the deployment of
Mark Kennedy, including a finding that he made 14 visits to Scotland.
[5] The petition contains allegations about industrial blacklisting of construction
workers. The averments were added on the last day for adjustment.
[6] The petitioner avers that the second decision was taken in September 2016, and that
further reasons for it were given in February 2018. The second respondents maintain that
the decision was taken in February 2018. Their position was, therefore, initially, that the
To continue reading
Request your trial