Relations with families and others who called for the public inquiry

Very often a public inquiry is established because of pressure from a small group, for example the families of people who have been killed. Such groups will naturally feel that they have a special relationship with the public inquiry and indeed may feel proprietorial towards it. Equally naturally, the public inquiry will cherish its independence. Managing those conflicting approaches requires careful thought from the outset. In the cases of the Northern Irish public inquiries, established after the Cory Report as part of the Good Friday peace process , the families of the victims had a good deal of discussions with the sponsoring Minister in relation to the composition of the Panels and the like. The Minister left it to each public inquiry to decide whether the Chairmen would meet the families.

Legally qualified Chairmen are reluctant to meet the families or other pressure groups in such circumstances, as they are acutely aware of the possibility of fostering a perception that they are a continuation of the struggle to get justice. Experience shows that most groups who have called for the establishment of a public inquiry are satisfied if they meet Counsel to the Inquiry and perhaps the Inquiry Solicitor. Obviously, such meetings need to be sympathetically handled and carefully recorded, so that no untoward promises are made to the family. However, a public inquiry could usefully bear in mind that where its establishment is the result of a campaign by a particular group, that group is likely to have significant knowledge of the matters under investigation and may be able to provide lines of inquiry and insights into the location of documents and other materials. It is highly likely that such a group will be made an core participant.