The Report
of the Iraq Inquiry
“Should
DFID’s employees be in Iraq at all, given current circumstances?
The
answer is
that DFID is free to employ its employees on work which will expose
them
to
unavoidable risk of injury or death (ie against which it cannot
guard by taking
precautions);
and, in the absence of express stipulation to the contrary, the
risk is
held to be
with them and not with DFID. The law, however, requires DFID to use
all
reasonable
care to diminish any inherent dangers, if it cannot eliminate
these; and,
if (as
I presume to be the case here) it cannot effectively eliminate the
dangers
so that
significant risks remain, it may be required to give its employees
such
information
which is available to it to help them evaluate properly the
benefits of
being in
Iraq against the risks. However, such a duty is more likely to
arise where
the risks
are not
common
knowledge (which I would say they probably are here).
“DFID is
not legally obliged to provide staff of consultancy organisations
with the
same level
of support as it gives its own employees. Nor is it required by law
to
underwrite
the steps taken by NGOs to support their staff working in
Iraq.”
323.
On 29 July,
Treasury Solicitors added that DFID should “consider carrying
out
formal,
periodic risk assessments as a further safeguard, and amending
advice and
procedures
as a result of any relevant risks identified”.221
324.
The first
version of the DFID guidance on duty of care seen by the Inquiry is
dated
January
2005.222
It
stated:
“DFID has a
responsibility to take reasonable measures to protect its
employees
from risk
of injury (physical, psychological) or death … DFID does not
guarantee
that an
employee will not be injured … In taking reasonable care, DFID will
only be
liable if
there is some lack of care on its part for failing to prevent
something that was
reasonably
foreseeable …
“All
employees have a duty to take all reasonable steps to mitigate any
risks to their
safety and
security to which they are exposed …
“All
UK‑based DFID staff visiting or working in Iraq are volunteers and
are under no
obligation
to travel to Iraq and can leave Iraq at any time without penalty
…”
325.
On the
question of DFID’s obligations to non‑DFID staff, the guidance
stated:
“Individual
consultants are not the employees of DFID and are ultimately
responsible
for their
own well‑being and security arrangements … However, bearing in
mind
the
prevailing security conditions and difficulty of working in Iraq,
DFID aims to
provide
solo and singleton consultants with the same levels of security,
logistical
and counselling
support as it does its own staff …
…
221
Letter
Marriott and Treasury Solicitors [junior official] to Department
for International Development
[junior
official], 29 July 2004, ‘Duty of care document’.
222
Paper Iraq
Directorate, January 2005, ‘Iraq: Guidance for DFID on its duty of
care’.
300