Overview
Executive summary
This paper’s main purpose is to present a different vision for public inquiry, one that would position it as a key component of a public right to justice. Through the analysis of current processes (and subject to research into missing information, particularly the lived experience of those involved), it advocates for public inquiry as a standing institution to investigate systemic harm for the benefit of both those affected and the wider public. Its primary purpose is to uncover the truth(s) of the issue. All other aims depend on this being met.
Reimagined forms of public inquiries would then have to be suitable for fulfilling that idea. Currently this is not the case. To be just in themselves, they would have to be launched for the right reasons, at the right time, by the right means, and with the right outcomes.
The paper concludes by recommending that:
- The concept of public inquiry as a standing institution be developed with public justice in mind and according to right reasons, time, means, and outcomes.
- Government should not have exclusive powers to order a public inquiry.
- Parliament, on the advice of an independent, permanent Council of Inquiries, should have parallel power to order a public inquiry in accordance with set criteria.
- The power should be exercised when the criteria are satisfied and where government has failed to do so.
- The criteria should be founded on the primary purpose of finding the ‘truths’ of a matter, where they are obscured by suspected cover-ups, governmental or institutional secrecy, or complexity.
- Further criteria for holding a particular public inquiry (developing suggestions made by the then Public Administration Select Committee in 2005), should include (a) a clear and general systemic problem (whether on-going or historic) exists; (b) a government or public body has failed in some respect, causing harm, failing to prevent it, or failing to find a remedy; (c) there are clear policy implications that can be resolved through careful examination; (d) a high level of public concern is evident; (e) public confidence in state institutions have been impacted; and (f) other methods of justice have been exhausted.
- Howsoever launched, public inquiries should take the form appropriate to uncovering the truth as broadly conceived. They should not follow the current legalistic model, unless required to fulfil human rights law demands, but should take inspiration from good practices and principles of social science and other disciplines too.
- As they are for the public and in public, inquiries should be people-centred and trauma-informed – protecting, respecting, and supporting those harmed as a priority.
- Just outcomes recommended by an inquiry process should be implemented by government under the review and scrutiny of the Council of Inquiries reporting to Parliament.
With such recommendations, this paper argues that public inquiry may develop as an idea and institution of justice that is more productive for people harmed and the public, and more effective and timely as an instrument of public justice, change, and accountability.
This report considers the drawbacks of public inquiries in formation, operation, and outcomes and analyses proposals that have been put forward to make them more effective.
