header-logo header-logo

COVID-19: Public inquiry ‘inevitable’

20 May 2020
Issue: 7887 / Categories: Legal News , Covid-19 , Public
printer mail-detail
A growing number of lawyers are calling for a public inquiry into the government’s handling of the COVID-19 pandemic

Elkan Abrahamson, director at Liverpool firm Broudie Jackson Canter, said a public inquiry was ‘inevitable and essential’.

‘I accept that having a full inquiry now would involve experts whose time might be better spent advising the government. Yet any post-COVID inquiry will come too late to prevent the deaths that must surely result from the government’s latest decision to relax movement restrictions. 

‘So, we should start an inquiry immediately with the initial purpose of simply gathering and sharing evidence―hearings can come later.’

Former head of the Home Civil Service Sir Bob Kerslake and the Trades Union Congress have also urged a public inquiry. Nick Griffin QC, of QEB Hollis Whiteman, suggested in this week’s Law  Society Gazette that there was ‘a solid basis for triggering an inquiry’.

Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Kemp, public law partner, Kingsley Napley, says the government could find itself compelled to hold an inquiry under Art 2 of the European Convention on Human Rights, which imposes ‘a positive obligation to take appropriate measures to safeguard life’. Article 2 includes an ‘investigative duty’, which ‘is engaged where “systemic” issues are suspected to have contributed to a person’s death’, she says.

Kemp sets out areas likely to form part of the terms of reference of any future inquiry. These are: early decision making and planning; the policy and guidance on discharging hospital patients to care homes; and PPE (personal protective equipment) supply, resourcing and guidance that ran contrary to many doctors’ concerns.

She also highlights key policy decisions that were out of step with World Health Organisation (WHO) guidance, and which participants in a future inquiry may argue were inconsistent with the government’s obligation to take practical steps to reduce the risk of death. They include the 12 March decision to end testing and contact tracing when moving from the ‘contain’ phase to ‘delay phase’ of the government response, ‘the apparent decision to adopt a “herd immunity” strategy during the ‘delay phase’; and whether lockdown was introduced too late.

Issue: 7887 / Categories: Legal News , Covid-19 , Public
printer mail-details
RELATED ARTICLES

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Hugh James—Phil Edwards

Hugh James—Phil Edwards

Serious injury teambolstered by high-profile partner hire

Freeths—Melanie Stancliffe

Freeths—Melanie Stancliffe

Firm strengthens employment team with partner hire

DAC Beachcroft—Tim Barr

DAC Beachcroft—Tim Barr

Lawyers’ liability practice strengthened with partner appointment in London

NEWS
Tech companies will be legally required to prevent material that encourages or assists serious self-harm appearing on their platforms, under Online Safety Act 2023 regulations due to come into force in the autumn
Commercial leasehold, the defence of insanity and ‘consent’ in the criminal law are among the next tranche of projects for the Law Commission
The Bar has a culture of ‘impunity’ and ‘collusive bystanding’ in which making a complaint is deemed career-ending due to a ‘cohort of untouchables’ at the top, Baroness Harriet Harman KC has found
Lawyers have broadly welcomed plans to electronically tag up to 22,000 more offenders, scrap most prison terms below a year and make prisoners ‘earn’ early release
David Lammy, Ellie Reeves and Baroness Levitt have taken up office at the Ministry of Justice, following the cabinet reshuffle
back-to-top-scroll