| dc.description.abstract | In an atmosphere of palpable societal concern, government initiation of a public inquiry in the aftermath of a crisis, disaster, or even wrongdoing, is a common feature of the UK’s political system. The inevitability of this probing instrument into public sector preparedness to tackle COVID-19, for example, was mooted even in the early stages of the pandemic in 2020. This creeping presence in the popular lexicon and acute public outcry for its establishment is indicative of the significance it holds in finding accountability, with 32 appointed since the UK’s Inquires Act 2005, of which are 15 currently ongoing. These full statutory versions, ranging from the Edinburgh Tram Inquiry to the Death of Dawn Sturgess, are joined on the review roundabout by less formal, ad hoc investigations including non-statutory inquiries, independent panels and Royal Commissions. This latter measure was historically much more in the favour of the ruling elite, with almost 400 exercised between 1830 and 1900. This number drastically declined to a point at which only 3 have been set up since the 1990s; in contrast to its Australian and New Zealand counterparts, the reduced popularity of this weaker form of investigatory power appears to be the victim of a creeping predominance of judicial type measures. In 2019, however, both the Conservative and Labour manifestos promised Royal Commissions across the criminal justice system, substance abuse, and health and safety legislation. Although quickly criticised as outdated and ineffective in consensus building, their unlikely resurrection does not easily disband with a wider discussion on the utility of statutory public inquiries. A tendency to adopt forensic style investigations, with enforcement of the production of evidence readily backed by the courts, that proliferate a judicial tone of seeking blame, threatens to overshadow the important understanding of more deep-rooted societal issues. The extent to which non-statutory inquiry types can now escape these litigious tendencies, however, remains dubious.
This chapter provides an overview of the development of public inquiries in the UK. It continues to detail the habitual patterns of behaviour concerning truth-seeking and accountability that have emanated in the statutory process, and the associated weaknesses in accommodating broader processes of social change and/or complex cultural matters - unpacked here through the examples of racism and social housing. Concerns with the popularity of the statutory approach are extended into adversarialism seemingly catalysed by Section 21’s legal disclosure measures, with limits on the privilege of self-incrimination of witnesses played out in the cases of the Manchester Arena Bombing, and Bloody Sunday and Ladbroke Grove inquiries. Against the backdrop of the ongoing COVID-19 inquiry, a consideration that judicial capture drives a reluctance of individuals to aid these truth-seeking activities for fear of personal consequences is submitted. | en_GB |
