Page 16 - When Things Go Wrong

the inability of bereaved and survivor core participants to ask questions of
witnesses through their own lawyers; and the unsuitability of the Phase I
hearings venue were invariably cited as threats to the legitimacy of the process
18
and its ability to establish the truth.

1.14 Recognising these concerns, the scope of this project expanded beyond the
issue of duplication and delay. Recent JUSTICE working party reports have
considered how users of the justice system experience its processes,
recommending system-wide reforms to promote the effective participation of
lay users. We were keen to apply this approach in the context of inquiries, in
19
a renewed attempt to place bereaved people and survivors at the heart of the
process.

Issue three: effecting change

1.15 The effective participation of lay users should serve as a primary objective in
all jurisdictions. But inquests and inquiries play a unique function: they “offer
to victims of suspected human rights abuse the promise of civil, criminal and
broader social justice, which could not otherwise be readily achievable through
ordinary litigation and/or parliamentary oversight”. Inherent in this promise
20
is the formulation of recommendations, directed at ensuring that a similar fatal
event will never happen again.

1.16 However, as identified by the Institute for Government’s 2017 report How
public inquiries can lead to change:

The formal checks and procedures we have in place to ensure that public
inquiries lead to change are inadequate. There is no routine procedure

18 Concerns as to whether a State-led inquiry can serve the interests of bereaved people are not a recent
phenomenon. In the very first intended inquiry under the Inquiries Act 2005, the family of Pat Finucane
declined to take part due to concerns about the inherent lack of independence of the Chair. See Peter
Watkin-Jones and Nicholas Griffin QC, ‘Public Inquiries: Getting at the Truth’ (Law Gazette, 22 June
2015), p. 22.
19 See in particular, JUSTICE Working Party report, Understanding Courts (2019). See also JUSTICE
Working Party report, Mental Health and Fair Trial (2017); and JUSTICE Working Party report, What
is a Court? (2016).

20 Friedman QC, supra note 8, para 2.
9