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 http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/aug/13/chilcot-inquiry-soldiers-families-legal-action-delay

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

Version 0 Version 1
Chilcot inquiry: soldiers' families threaten legal action over delay Chilcot inquiry: soldiers' families threaten legal action over delay
(35 minutes later)
Families of soldiers killed during the Iraq war have have threatened legal action over the long-awaited Chilcot inquiry into the conflict if the report is not published by the end of the year. Families of soldiers killed during the Iraq war have have threatened legal action over the long-awaited Chilcot inquiry if the report is not published by the end of the year.
A group of at least 29 families issued the ultimatum to the inquiry’s chairman, Sir John Chilcot, in a legal letter warning that it would seek a judicial review over any further delays. A group of at least 29 families issued the ultimatum to the inquiry’s chairman, Sir John Chilcot, in a legal letter warning that it would seek a judicial review over any further delays to the report into the conflict.
One of the group, Reg Keys, whose son Tom was killed in 2003, said: “We want to give a deadline now for the end of the year, or legal action will be following.”One of the group, Reg Keys, whose son Tom was killed in 2003, said: “We want to give a deadline now for the end of the year, or legal action will be following.”
Speaking on BBC Radio 4’s Today programme, Keys, who stood against Tony Blair as an anti-war candidate in the 2005 election, added: “We are not talking months overdue, we are talking six years overdue. What Sir John doesn’t understand is the strength of feeling among the bereaved … We want closure on this. It has to be done fairly and it has to be done right, but he’s had time enough now.” Speaking on BBC Radio 4’s Today programme, Keys, who stood against Tony Blair as an anti-war candidate in the 2005 election, added: “We are not talking months overdue, we are talking six years overdue.
“What Sir John doesn’t understand is the strength of feeling among the bereaved … We want closure on this. It has to be done fairly and it has to be done right, but he’s had time enough now.”
David Cameron has demanded a timetable for publication of the report “pretty soon”, in a sign of exasperation at the repeated delays in the process. The inquiry opened in 2009 and concluded in 2011.David Cameron has demanded a timetable for publication of the report “pretty soon”, in a sign of exasperation at the repeated delays in the process. The inquiry opened in 2009 and concluded in 2011.
Chilcot has refused to give a timetable for the publication of the report . He told the chairman of foreign affairs select committee, Sir Crispin Blunt, that he was still waiting for witnesses to respond to planned criticisms in the report, under the so-called Maxwellisation process. He is also examining fresh evidence. Chilcot has refused to give a timetable for the publication of the report . He told the chairman of the foreign affairs select committee, Sir Crispin Blunt, that he was still waiting for witnesses to respond to planned criticisms in the report, under the Maxwellisation process – where anyone likely to face criticism is given a chance to respond before publication . He is also examining fresh evidence.
Keys said Chilcot appeared to be giving too much consideration to politicians, senior civil servants and army officers criticised in the report and not enough to the families of soldiers. “Give them a deadline, give them three months, if they don’t respond publish anyway,” Keys urged Chilcot. He said there was no legal precedent for the Maxwellisation process, citing the example of the inquiry into failings at Staffordshire hospital. Keys said Chilcot appeared to be giving too much consideration to politicians, senior civil servants and army officers criticised in the report and not enough to the families of soldiers. “Give them a deadline, give them three months, if they don’t respond, publish anyway,” Keys urged Chilcot.
He said there was no legal precedent for the Maxwellisation process, citing the example of the inquiry into failings at Staffordshire hospital.
Matthew Jury, a lawyer representing the families, said:“The law demands that any inquiry be concluded within a reasonable period.” Speaking to Today, he added: “Without a timetable imposed upon the Maxwell process, it seems to us that there can be no guarantee that the report is going to be issued within a reasonable timeframe.Matthew Jury, a lawyer representing the families, said:“The law demands that any inquiry be concluded within a reasonable period.” Speaking to Today, he added: “Without a timetable imposed upon the Maxwell process, it seems to us that there can be no guarantee that the report is going to be issued within a reasonable timeframe.
“There have been outrageous delays to date and it seems that those delays could simply be interminable. The families are simply not content to wait forever. If Sir John doesn’t impose a timetable on the Maxwell process and give a firm deadline for publication then they will be seeking judicial redress.”“There have been outrageous delays to date and it seems that those delays could simply be interminable. The families are simply not content to wait forever. If Sir John doesn’t impose a timetable on the Maxwell process and give a firm deadline for publication then they will be seeking judicial redress.”
Roger Bacon, whose son Major Matthew Bacon, 34, died in a bomb blast in Basra 10 years ago, told the Daily Mail the delays were “morally reprehensible”. He said: “We have lost our sons, daughters, brothers and sisters and if we don’t get answers as to why they died, it will all have been a waste of time.” Roger Bacon, whose son Maj Matthew Bacon, 34, died in a bomb blast in Basra 10 years ago, told the Daily Mail the delays were “morally reprehensible”. He said: “We have lost our sons, daughters, brothers and sisters and if we don’t get answers as to why they died, it will all have been a waste of time.”
General Sir Michael Rose, a former SAS commander, is backing the families’ call for urgent publication of the report . Writing in the Mail, he said: “I have become increasingly concerned that the interests of the 179 families who lost sons and daughters during that war and the thousands of service personnel who were injured are not being properly represented by the Chilcot inquiry.General Sir Michael Rose, a former SAS commander, is backing the families’ call for urgent publication of the report . Writing in the Mail, he said: “I have become increasingly concerned that the interests of the 179 families who lost sons and daughters during that war and the thousands of service personnel who were injured are not being properly represented by the Chilcot inquiry.
“It is simply not good enough for Chilcot to state that ‘no one has taken an unreasonable length of time to respond given the range and complexity of the issues’.”“It is simply not good enough for Chilcot to state that ‘no one has taken an unreasonable length of time to respond given the range and complexity of the issues’.”