Ending a public inquiry

By report

The usual way for an inquiry to end is for the Inquiry Chairman or Panel to deliver their report to the Minister. For the purposes of the Inquiries Act 2005, section 14(1)(a) states that the inquiry comes to an end after the delivery of the report of the inquiry, on which the Chairman notifies the Minister that the inquiry has fulfilled its terms of reference. This cannot, by section 14(2), be done retroactively. Any proceedings up to the date that the Chairman notifies the Minister that the inquiry is ending would be valid.

There is no specified time between completion of hearing evidence and delivery of report, despite how attractive the prospect would be for the purse-holder, as it would be inappropriate to have one. The judges on the Bloody Sunday Inquiry retired to consider their report on 23 November 2004 and as of May 2009 are yet to report. In contrast, The Hutton Inquiry, which was tasked with urgent investigation, completed its 22 days of oral evidence on 24 September 2003 and reported on 28 January 2004.

By notice

A Minister also has the power under section 14(1)(b), after consultation with the Chairman, to end the inquiry on any earlier date specified in a notice given to the Chairman by the Minister.

Where this power is exercised, by section 14(4) the Minister must set out in the notice his reasons for bringing the inquiry to an end and lay a copy of the notice before the relevant Parliament or Assembly as soon as is reasonably practical.

Clearly this is a very broad power and the only recourse for challenge of such a decision would be judicial review.  The power has not yet been exercised and its scope has been the subject of some considerable controversy. In particular, the family of Billy Wright challenged the decision to convert the Billy Wright Inquiry from one to be carried out under the Prison Act (Northern Ireland) 1953 to an inquiry under the Inquiries Act 2005 on the grounds that the independence of such an inquiry was compromised by the existence of section 14 (1) (b).  The Northern Ireland Court of Appeal asked itself the question: if the Secretary of State has power to bring an inquiry to an end, does that ineluctably compromise its independence? Kerr LCJ, Campbell LJ and Girvan LJ concluded that they did not believe that it does. The opportunity to stop the Inquiry did not have a direct impact on its independence. It may affect its usefulness in that it halts the investigation on which the Inquiry has embarked but it does not alter the autonomy of the Inquiry while it is taking place.

The explanatory notes to the Inquiries Act 2005, while inadmissible as an aid to construction, suggest that this power should be exercised in situations such as when, “evidence … emerge[s] that obviated the need to hold an inquiry or demonstrates that the inquiry has the wrong focus, for example if it emerged during an inquiry that the event being investigated was an act of sabotage, rather than failings of a particular system, and therefore ought to be dealt with by the police rather than an inquiry.  Other events might occur which also need to be investigated and it may be more appropriate to set up a single, wider-ranging inquiry, perhaps with a different Panel.  Something might happen, such as a fire or a death of a witness, which means that an inquiry will no longer have access to the evidence it needs to conduct an effective investigation and it may no longer be in the public interest for it to continue.  Such events are unlikely, but possible.”  It is important to note there is no public interest test contained within section 14.  However, the authors expect that this power would be exercised with caution.  That a public inquiry has been set up follows the determination of rather serious public concern and to end that inquiry without good reason would surely exacerbate the public concern.

Inquiry ceasing to be appropriate

The ending of a public inquiry may not give rise to concern.  It may become apparent that a public inquiry is not the appropriate vehicle for investigation, accountability and the learning of lessons and that there is a better mechanism by which to achieve the aims of the inquiry.

Submitting a lessons learned report

At the end of an inquiry, the inquiry team will usually be required to submit a lessons learned report to the Minister. Such a report will usually remain confidential.