After six years of waiting, the government response to the landmark review by James Jones, the former bishop of Liverpool, was a betrayal of and an insult to the Hillsborough bereaved and survivors and all they have fought for over more than three decades (Government rejects ‘Hillsborough law’ central to campaign by victims’ families, 6 December). The review exposed how the interests of powerful institutions and individuals prevail over bereaved people seeking the truth about how their relative died.
Institutional defensiveness remains the default position from state bodies in inquests and inquiries into state-related deaths. The government has rejected calls for a statutory duty of candour across public authorities, which would end obstructive and evasive practices following state-related deaths. Instead, it relies on a toothless code of conduct and an unenforceable charter. It has rejected increasing legal aid to ensure a level playing field between public authorities, which are routinely funded from the public purse, and those affected by inquiries and inquests.
The systems for responding to deaths must be fair and enable accountability. Both the lack of candour and inequality of arms undermine the fundamental purpose of inquests and inquiries to reach the truth and the identification of dangerous or defective practices so that learning can be enacted to ensure similar tragedies are averted.
As the Hillsborough Law Now coalition of survivors, the bereaved and others affected by contentious deaths argues, it is only the enactment of a “Hillsborough law” that will ensure there is no hiding place for official wrongdoing or failure, and address this power imbalance. At the crux of this is the democratic accountability of public authorities at an individual and corporate level.
Deborah Coles
Director, Inquest
• Have an opinion on anything you’ve read in the Guardian today? Please email us your letter and it will be considered for publication in our letters section.
