BishopAccountability.org
 
 

What Next for the Child Abuse Inquiry after Its Top Lawyer’s Departure?

By Sandra Laville
The Guardian
September 30, 2016

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2016/sep/30/what-next-for-child-abuse-inquiry-after-lead-counsel-suspension-ben-emmerson

Ben Emmerson QC’s departure is unlikely to bring the inquiry crashing down – too much rests on it, politically. Photograph: Sarah Lee for the Guardian

What does the resignation of the lead counsel to the child abuse inquiry mean?

Few doubt that departure of Ben Emmerson QC, who for the last two years has been lead counsel to the national child abuse inquiry, is anything other than a damaging blow to its operations. The inquiry emerged from the shockwaves of the Jimmy Savile revelations, which exposed for the first time how an abuser could operate in plain sight within institutions from the National Health Service to the BBC.

Since its inception in July 2014 as the brainchild of then home secretary Theresa May, the inquiry has had Emmerson at its core. But his departure is unlikely to bring it crashing down. Politically, too much rests on making sure it continues, particularly as May was so personally involved in setting it up in the first place. May has also faced down opportunities to turn her back on the inquiry and see it closed in the past; particularly after the first major debacle, when it was redrawn and given statutory footing, following the departure of two chairwomen.

What is going on behind the scenes?

That is not completely clear. Emmerson, it seemed, wanted to resign as he felt unable to carry out the work under the new chair, Alexis Jay, who is reviewing the inquiry’s procedures. He attempted to resign on Wednesday, but was suspended late in the evening over “recent concerns” about his leadership. Twenty-four hours later, however, Jay allowed him to resign and thanked him for all his work. Whatever is going on behind closed doors, the image is of an inquiry riven by divisions, which are now spilling out in public. Several survivors’ and victims’ groups have expressed grave concerns about what looks like chaos at the heart of the inquiry.

What is the problem with the inquiry?

Many inside and outside the inquiry would say it is just too large, its focus is too broad, and there are no time parameters set on its remit. It was set up to examine state and non-state institutions over an open-ended time period, and to be comprehensive, inclusive and thorough. To date, 13 investigations have been set up that will result in public hearings. But in some of these cases the subject matter could have constituted a public inquiry in its own right – the abuse of children in Lambeth children’s homes, for example, or the abuse of children within the Roman Catholic church and the Church of England. Separate to these public hearings, the independent inquiry has set up a Truth Project to take testimony from thousands of victims of child abuse across the country in five regional centres – a huge task in itself, and one that the outgoing chair, Lowell Goddard, suggested should be reestablished as a standalone, more holistic entity. Many believe it needs to be redrawn to have a lead counsel at the head of each separate strand of the inquiry.

Is there any hope of it being completed?

Possibly. Some who have been close to the inquiry have suggested that the separate public hearings should be reduced, and that in some of the subject areas judge-led reviews of the evidence could take place, saving time and resources that could then be focused on areas that require full public hearings. But this approach is fraught with controversy, as victims’ groups could legitimately question why some establishments are deemed suitable for public hearings while others are not.

Goddard identified shocking and avoidable delays in the inquiry’s work in a letter after she resigned. These included the lack of an evidence-management system to process the thousands of documents submitted to the inquiry, and difficulty in securing a centre in which to hold the public hearings, meaning the first of them will not take place until 2017. She also criticised the bureaucratic approach of the civil servant-heavy inquiry secretariat. All of these are problems that have solutions, and some have already been addressed.

Has such an inquiry ever been carried out before?

Yes. Other countries have successfully managed similar, albeit much smaller inquiries. Key among these are the Australian Royal commission into institutional responses to child sexual abuse, which has held public hearings at which establishments, abuses within them and the cover-up of such have been investigated, and a truth project in which victims have given testimony. In Northern Ireland, too, the historical abuse inquiry has been completed, and its final report is in the process of being written by the chair, Sir Anthony Hart. It successfully held an acknowledgement forum, at which members listened to the experiences of people who lived in residential institutions as children between 1922 and 1995. It held 223 days of public statutory hearings into 22 institutions.

 

 

 

 

 




.

 
 

Any original material on these pages is copyright © BishopAccountability.org 2004. Reproduce freely with attribution.