The 24 year old died from a single gunshot to the head in September last year.
It’s after the Audi he was driving was blocked in by a police vehicle and an officer shot him through the car windscreen.
The judge dismissed attempts by the officer, named only as NX121, to have his identity withheld from the public.
He’ll be named in January.
Usually, defendants are named publicly at the point they are charged with a criminal offence but a district judge granted the officer a temporary legal order banning his identification when he first appeared in court last month.
In response to the announcement Assistant Commissioner Matt Twist said: “I recognise that for officers this decision will be hugely concerning, and that the impact of this and recent cases is felt right across armed policing and beyond.
“The Met has supported the anonymity hearing by providing evidence and factual information to His Honour Judge Lucraft KC to assist him in making a decision. We take seriously the open justice principle, however it was important to make the court aware of the effect that loss of anonymity would have in this case. We acknowledge the judgement by the court and note the detailed and careful consideration that has taken place.
“We have also been continuing to make representation in the strongest terms to Government to expedite their Accountability Review, and welcome the commitment given by the Home Secretary for the review to report by the end of the year.
“Armed officers in London typically respond to around 4,000 armed incidents and 800 pre-planned operations every year, plus recover hundreds of firearms and weapons. Yet on average over the last 20 years firearms have been discharged at suspects on two or fewer occasions per year. Shootings by our armed officers are very rare.
“Taking on the additional responsibilities of being a firearms officer is voluntary in this country due to the very real additional risks the role entails. Accountability will always be crucial, however, it must be an accountability system that officers, and the public, can see fairly takes into consideration and gives appropriate legal protection to the unique role we ask armed officers to undertake.
“A role that is absolutely critical, in ensuring that the public and unarmed colleagues are protected from the most severe and very real threats faced on a daily basis.”