Judicial attention has largely focused on two issues: (1) the extent to which the use of undercover police operations may lead to the exclusion of prosecution evidence or even to a complete stay of the proceedings, and (2) the extent to which sensitive information about undercover operations may justifiably be withheld from the defense. The English courts have tended to advocate the use of balancing tests to resolve issues without clearly articulating the considerations courts must address in performing these tests. The analysis of undercover police issues in England, the United States, and Canada as well as the imminent incorporation of the European Convention on Human Rights into English law via the Human Rights Act 1998, suggests the need for three changes in England. The recommended changes include the special handling of entrapment issues, clearer guidelines to govern the use of discretion in these operations, and the introduction of legislation or a code of practice governing undercover police operations. Finally, the balancing test recommended by Sir Richard Scott should replace the unduly vague balancing test that British courts currently use. 39 references (Author abstract modified)