REUTERS

LONDON: Undercover police cannot be banned from having sex with their targets because extremist groups would use the rule as a litmus text to identify officers, a watchdog admits.

The Chief Inspector of Constabulary said officers who infiltrated groups of suspected activists had never been stopped from striking up liaisons.

But Sir Denis O’Connor admitted that while there were rules governing officers’ behaviour, these had to remain secret to stop the guidelines being used to “out” police spies.

The police watchdog was called in after several high-profile cases led to a secretive unit being branded the “under the covers squad”.

Among them was Met officer Mark Kennedy who conducted a string of affairs over seven years with eco-activists.

His former colleague, Jim Boyling, married a campaigner and fathered two children after infiltrating the anti-capitalist movement Reclaim The Streets.

Sir Denis said last night: “The code expects the best from police officers. They are governed by regulations and the law when they’re undercover as they are when they’re wearing the uniform.

“But it would be unwise for us to get into details about their behaviour because there are people who study these things and they would automatically become tests for those individuals.”

The former Surrey chief constable spoke as he unveiled a report into undercover operations.

He revealed that anonymous officers had helped stop bombs and guns getting into the hands of extremists and had foiled plots aimed at disrupting power supplies and railway lines.

But tighter controls were needed to protect the public from unnecessary intrusion and an independent body should approve long-term operations, he added.

Sir Denis highlighted how the Home Secretary had to sign off on a 15 second wire-tap but an assistant chief constable could authorise an undercover operation lasting years.

He said oversight of operations targeting extremists and protesters was weaker compared to those against organised criminals and terrorists.

This was mainly because officers were likely to be trying to discover what protesters were up to rather than gathering evidence for a future court case.

His comments came after a senior colleague branded affairs between undercover officers and the public as “grossly unprofessional” and “morally wrong”. - Daily Mail