Indemnities of the public inquiry

A number of immunities and indemnities may be needed for a public inquiry. As suggested in the discussion about the personal liability of a Secretary to an inquiry, the staff will wish to have indemnities by which the sponsoring department holds them harmless against actions brought by suppliers. Further, the staff of a public inquiry will need protection against suit brought by witnesses and the like. Section 37 of the Inquiries Act 2005 provides immunity against suit and privilege in relation to members of a public inquiry established under that Act.

It may also be desirable to secure an undertaking from the Attorney General that no statement made by a witness in the public inquiry will be used against that witness in subsequent criminal proceedings, even though such a statement would ordinarily be admissible as an admission. This is a common procedure designed to ensure that witnesses are as candid as possible in giving their evidence. However, the question whether the Attorney General will give such an undertaking may depend on whether all foreseeable criminal proceedings have already been exhausted. Such an undertaking was, for example, given in the Stephen Lawrence Inquiry after the failure of private prosecutions.

Where witnesses may be called whose evidence may show that they have failed in their duties, for example as police officers or civil servants, it may be desirable to seek an undertaking from their employer that their evidence will not be used against them in subsequent disciplinary proceedings. Again, the advantage for a public inquiry of receiving such an undertaking is obvious. However, the advantage for the employer may be less obvious and in particular a public body employer will probably refuse to give an undertaking of that type which extends to any admission of serious misconduct. In the Robert Hamill Inquiry the Chief Constable of Northern Ireland gave a limited undertaking [link to relevant section on Robert Hamill page] by which he retained the ability to rely on admissions of serious disciplinary offences.