This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/apr/22/manchester-arena-bomb-survivors-denied-central-role-in-inquiry

The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Manchester Arena bomb survivors denied central role in inquiry Manchester Arena bomb survivors denied central role in inquiry
(about 1 hour later)
Group of 56 survivors will be able to participate as witnesses but cannot have legal representationGroup of 56 survivors will be able to participate as witnesses but cannot have legal representation
Survivors of the Manchester Arena bombing have been denied legal representation at the hearings after it was ruled they are not considered core participants.Survivors of the Manchester Arena bombing have been denied legal representation at the hearings after it was ruled they are not considered core participants.
A group of 56 survivors had wanted to play a central part at the inquiry, which is due to examine the intelligence background and emergency response on the day.A group of 56 survivors had wanted to play a central part at the inquiry, which is due to examine the intelligence background and emergency response on the day.
They include a father who was left in a wheelchair and another who was blinded in one eye.They include a father who was left in a wheelchair and another who was blinded in one eye.
The inquiry was due to begin on 15 June but has been delayed until September because of the coronavirus pandemic.The inquiry was due to begin on 15 June but has been delayed until September because of the coronavirus pandemic.
Brenda Campbell QC told a video-link hearing this month that holding an inquiry without their participation would be an “affront to the confidence of the public”.Brenda Campbell QC told a video-link hearing this month that holding an inquiry without their participation would be an “affront to the confidence of the public”.
She argued that those injured in the attack should be granted core participant status and be legally represented, including doctors, retired police officers and members of the public who “plugged a gap” in the emergency response as they waited hours for help to arrive.She argued that those injured in the attack should be granted core participant status and be legally represented, including doctors, retired police officers and members of the public who “plugged a gap” in the emergency response as they waited hours for help to arrive.
In total, 93 people were either seriously or very seriously injured in the suicide bombing in May 2017, along with the 22 fatalities.In total, 93 people were either seriously or very seriously injured in the suicide bombing in May 2017, along with the 22 fatalities.
Some remained in hospital for months, many were discharged to round-the-clock care and others were “learning to cope in a world they never previously conceived of,” said Campbell. Some remained in hospital for months, many were discharged to round-the-clock care and others were “learning to cope in a world they never previously conceived of”, said Campbell.
However, Sir John Saunders, the chairman of the public inquiry, has ruled they can participate as witnesses but cannot have legal representation.However, Sir John Saunders, the chairman of the public inquiry, has ruled they can participate as witnesses but cannot have legal representation.
In making his ruling, he issued a separate statement justifying his decision.In making his ruling, he issued a separate statement justifying his decision.
He accepted the attack had had a “terrible and lasting impact” on the survivors and added: “The injuries, trauma and personal tragedy that the survivors have suffered cannot be overstated.”He accepted the attack had had a “terrible and lasting impact” on the survivors and added: “The injuries, trauma and personal tragedy that the survivors have suffered cannot be overstated.”
He said: “I fully appreciate that this application is born of the desire of the survivors to ensure that the reasons for the attack are fully understood, the adequacy of the emergency response is examined, and that lessons are learned.”He said: “I fully appreciate that this application is born of the desire of the survivors to ensure that the reasons for the attack are fully understood, the adequacy of the emergency response is examined, and that lessons are learned.”
But he went on to say: “After a great deal of anxious thought, I have decided to refuse this application.”But he went on to say: “After a great deal of anxious thought, I have decided to refuse this application.”
The former high court judge said the survivors would still have a “voice in this inquiry”, adding: “I have concluded that they will be able to contribute to the inquiry without core participant status and I strongly encourage them to do so.”The former high court judge said the survivors would still have a “voice in this inquiry”, adding: “I have concluded that they will be able to contribute to the inquiry without core participant status and I strongly encourage them to do so.”
He promised the survivors would be able to raise any concerns with the legal team running the inquiry and help “identify lines of inquiry that they would wish to have pursued”.He promised the survivors would be able to raise any concerns with the legal team running the inquiry and help “identify lines of inquiry that they would wish to have pursued”.
Some bereaved families agreed with Saunders’ decision, saying he was correct to exclude survivors from core participation because they might “dilute the focus”.Some bereaved families agreed with Saunders’ decision, saying he was correct to exclude survivors from core participation because they might “dilute the focus”.
Following the ruling, Saoirse de Bont, a solicitor at Irwin Mitchell representing the survivors, said some of her clients had been “close to death” and they believed the inquiry would now be “limited” as a result of the ruling.Following the ruling, Saoirse de Bont, a solicitor at Irwin Mitchell representing the survivors, said some of her clients had been “close to death” and they believed the inquiry would now be “limited” as a result of the ruling.
She added: “The survivor victim families we represent are very disappointed with today’s decision. They will not have the same rights and access to the inquiry as other core participants such as the police and government.She added: “The survivor victim families we represent are very disappointed with today’s decision. They will not have the same rights and access to the inquiry as other core participants such as the police and government.
“They will not be able to play a core participant role in the inquiry and they believe that the investigation to learn lessons will be limited as a result.”“They will not be able to play a core participant role in the inquiry and they believe that the investigation to learn lessons will be limited as a result.”