Parliament
12 mentions of the inquiry in Parliament since December 2014: debates, written questions and statements, oral questions and early day motions, from Hansard.
Al-Sweady Inquiry
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, what the official closing date under section 14 of the Inquiries Act 2005 was for the public inquiry entitled Al-Sweady Inquiry.
The final report of the Al-Sweady Inquiry was published on 17 December 2014. The last members of the Inquiry staff were released in January 2015 and final administrative wind-up procedures completed in March 2015.The chair of the Inquiry, Sir Thayne Forbes, wrote to the then Secretary of State confirming the fulfilment of his terms of reference (a so-called Section 14 letter), on 20 March 2015.
Read full answer →Independent Inquiry relating to Afghanistan
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, what lessons he learned from the findings of Sir Thayne Forbes in the Al Sweady Inquiry for setting the terms of reference of the independent inquiry into alleged unlawful activity by British Armed Forces during deliberate detention operations in Afghanistan.
The Secretary of State for Defence engaged with Lord Justice Sir Charles Haddon-Cave, the inquiry chair, throughout the process of setting the terms of reference for the Independent Inquiry relating to Afghanistan (IIA).
As part of this process, Sir Charles and the Secretary of State considered comparable inquiries into historical allegations, including the Al-Sweady Inquiry, with regard to the IIA's terms of reference, resourcing requirements and anticipated costs.
Read full answer →Public Interest Lawyers
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, whether he reported Public Interest Lawyers to the Solicitors Regulation Authority.
Following his statement to the House on 17 December 2014 (Official Report, column 1407) on the Al-Sweady Inquiry Report, the Defence Secretary directed that evidence be submitted to the Solicitors Regulation Authority concerning potential breaches of professional standards by Public Interest lawyers and Leigh Day and Co.
Read full answer →Al-Sweady Inquiry
To ask Her Majesty’s Government what discussions they have had with the Director of Public Prosecutions about the possibility of charges of fraud, corruption, conspiracy and attempting to pervert the course of justice being brought against lawyers working for Leigh Day and Public Interest Lawyers with regard to the Al Sweady case.
The Crown Prosecution Service routinely provides the Attorney General with updates on cases and casework issues. In accordance with the practice adopted by previous Law Officers the Attorney General does not usually comment on which individual cases are raised with him.
Read full answer →Iraq Historic Allegations Team
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, whether the government has initiated legal action against any law firms for abuse of the Iraq Historic Allegations Team inquiry.
The Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) has been conducting a wide-ranging investigation into two firms - Leigh Day & Co, and Public Interest Lawyers - as a result of concerns about their conduct in the Al-Sweady Inquiry and associated litigation. Among other things, it is investigating how these firms obtain instructions from claimants in Iraq - a matter that is directly relevant to the unprecedented number of allegations with which the Iraq Historic Allegations Team is contending.
The Government welcomes the SRA's decision to refer Leigh Day & Co to the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal, and awaits its decision with regard to Public Interest Lawyers. We will decide what further action may be appropriate in the light of the results of this process.
Read full answer →Al-Sweady Inquiry
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, with reference to paragraph 45 of the Report of the Al Sweady Inquiry, HC 819, what plans the Government has to investigate the nine Iraqi detainee witnesses in relation to offences they may have committed (a) in relation to their evidence to the Inquiry and (b) against British troops serving in Iraq.
The British courts would have no jurisdiction over any offences committed by those individuals either in relation to their evidence to the Inquiry or against British troops serving in Iraq. All nine were however committed in 2004 for trial in Iraq. Two were acquitted due to lack of evidence, while those convicted were subsequently pardoned under a general amnesty.
Read full answer →Al-Sweady Inquiry
To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the statement made by the Secretary of State for Defence, Michael Fallon MP, on 17 December 2014 (HC Deb, cols 1407–9), whether they will take action against Public Interest Lawyers for pursuing "completely base
The Government is considering all available options
Read full answer →Al-Sweady Inquiry
To ask Her Majesty’s Government how much legal aid has been paid to Public Interest Lawyers in respect of allegations made during the Al-Sweady inquiry; and what steps they plan to take to recover such money.
Legal aid did not fund the Al-Sweady inquiry itself, nor did it fund the legal representation at the inquiry for the families of the Iraqi civilians who were killed.
However, the inquiry stemmed from six people bringing a civil judicial review claim against the Ministry of Defence. These challenges were funded by legal aid. Payments on account were made which amounted to £188,000.
The Justice Secretary ordered the LAA to conduct a rigorous review into the actions of Public Interest Lawyers in handling of evidence and documents relating to the Al-Sweady Inquiry. Some concerns were referred to the independent Solicitors Regulation Authority and they are now carrying out an investigation into these matters.
Read full answer →