Beleaguered Child Abuse Probe Faces a Cover-up Storm As It Denies Top Lawyer Quit over an Alleged Sex Assault
By Ebecca Camber
The inquiry said yesterday that neither its chairman, Professor Alexis Jay, her panel nor any official were aware of any complaint of sexual assault before Mr Emmerson resigned. But last night a source close to the inquiry said the alleged victim had made a ‘disclosure’ to another member of the inquiry that was passed to Professor Jay and the panel before Mr Emmerson’s departure. The source said: ‘The chair and panel were aware.’ It is claimed that the alleged victim did not make a formal complaint but told a colleague, who relayed this to Professor Jay in mid-September. The claim reported by BBC Newsnight on Thursday is threatening to derail the ?100million inquiry, now on its fourth chairman. Newsnight alleged that Mr Emmerson pushed a colleague against the side of a lift wall and groped her in September.
He quit on September 29 a day after being suspended by Professor Jay over alleged ‘concerns about his leadership’. But the barrister, who was on ?400,000 a year, has carried on working for the inquiry at home, earning ?1,700 a day during a changeover process. On Thursday, his lawyers told Newsnight: ‘[He] categorically denies any allegation of sexual assault or bullying or any other misconduct at the inquiry. Any such allegations are completely false.’ The alleged victim has also refused to comment on the allegations. But a source said last night the alleged victim had been treated unjustly, adding: ‘These people can’t be pious about other organisations when they don’t look into serious allegations themselves.’ According to another source, Professor Jay was told of the alleged incident in the lift, although this is strongly denied by the inquiry. ‘The child sex abuse inquiry should not be acting like other organisations it is investigating,’ the source said. ‘It needs to be held to higher standards when dealing with very sensitive issues. We are meant to be telling other organisations how to handle sex abuse.’ Last night Professor Jay was facing questions over what she knew of the allegations as a source told the Mail the ‘disclosure’ had gone ‘the whole way up’ the organisation. Yesterday the inquiry issued a statement denying there had been any sexual assault complaint to Professor Jay, who gave Mr Emmerson a glowing send-off when he resigned, saying he ‘has made an enormous contribution to the inquiry and we wish him well’.
A spokesman said: ‘The chairman fully stands by the statement she made on September 29. 'It is not true that an inquiry worker made a complaint of sexual assault to the chairman, or to the panel, or to an official.’ Professor Jay and her two panel members, Drusilla Sharpling and Ivor Frank, remained silent about why the QC was suspended when they were questioned by the Home Affairs Select Committee last week. Last night MP Tim Loughton, who quizzed them in his role as acting chairman of the committee, said: ‘Professor Jay… is letting down survivors by not being more transparent about what is going on in the inquiry. ‘It is ironic that an inquiry into cover-ups about historical child sexual abuse is handling things in this way and does need to be much more transparent.’ Daniel Janner QC, whose father Lord Janner was accused of historical sexual allegations that will be heard as part of the public inquiry, said last night: ‘Professor Jay’s position surely is now untenable. How can my family trust this discredited process?’ Victims have reacted with anger to the claims. Phil Johnson, acting chairman of Minister and Clergy Sexual Abuse Survivors, said: ‘It’s ridiculous that an institution set up to investigate cover-ups is allegedly behaving in this way. This feels like the nail in the coffin of the inquiry, which is not what we want. ‘We have waited for 20 years to get an inquiry to get to the truth – but not this inquiry. It isn’t fit.’ Mr Emmerson refused to comment yesterday, saying: I’m not taking any calls.’
The crisis engulfing the child abuse inquiry deepened last night as victims issued the Home Secretary with an ultimatum to sack the chairman or face a legal challenge in the courts. A victims’ group has written to Amber Rudd challenging the appointment of the inquiry’s fourth chairman, Professor Alexis Jay. White Flowers Alba, which represents 30 survivors of institutionalised child sexual abuse, has demanded that Miss Rudd formally apologise, terminate Professor Jay’s appointment, suspend the inquiry and agree to a new transparent process for appointing a chairman and all other key positions or it will launch a judicial review in the High Court next week. Imran Khan, a solicitor who represents the group, wrote to Miss Rudd saying the decision to appoint Professor Jay was ‘procedurally unfair’. He said there should have been ‘consultation with the proposed claimant’. He also argued that the appointment was unlawful ‘in that it breached a substantive legitimate expectation that the inquiry chair would have legal qualifications’. He said ‘Professor Jay is not legally qualified’. The letter also accuses Professor Jay of ‘objective bias’ as she previously worked as a social worker in Scotland. The challenge raises questions about Theresa May’s judgment in hastily appointing Professor Jay after Dame Justice Lowell Goddard quit in August. The letter says: ‘Professor Jay is insufficiently qualified to hold public bodies to account and she lacks the trust and confidence of survivor groups. ‘She is not only associated with but directly responsible, with Judge Goddard and other panel members, with what can only be described as the mismanagement of the inquiry to date.’ Any judicial review would further delay the inquiry, which has already spent more than ?20million and amassed millions of pages of documents but has yet to hear a word of evidence two years after it was set up.
|
.
Any original material on these pages is copyright © BishopAccountability.org 2004. Reproduce freely with attribution.