Previous page | Contents | Next page
16.3  |  Military fatalities and the bereaved
believed that it was possible both to respect that independence and to seek
to understand “how the system is working for them from their point of view”.
189.  Sir Bill Jeffrey responded to the requests for advice on how the BOI process
could be improved and how the existing process could be accelerated in a minute
to Mr Ainsworth at the end of February 2008.111
190.  Sir Bill advised that, in response to Mr Browne’s question, it would be possible to
hold a relatively short fact‑finding exercise followed by a “fuller inquiry into the whole
course of events”. While the Nimrod XV230 BOI included a careful investigation of the
incident itself, its remit did not extend into the history and safety record of the Nimrod;
that question was now being examined by Mr Charles Haddon‑Cave. Where there was
“a need to capture the broader departmental perspective, and where there is high public
interest in the case”, the remit of the BOI could be broadened or a “further reaching
independent inquiry”, running concurrently with the BOI, could be held.
191.  Sir Bill also advised that:
A new direction should be issued to the chain of command, that families should
always be briefed as soon as practicable after an incident and kept regularly
informed thereafter.
A new joint Secretariat should be established, building on the Army’s Inquest
Cell, to co‑ordinate all three Services’ management of inquests, the relationship
with coroners and joint reports to Ministers.
192.  The Army had appointed Permanent Presidents to lead high‑profile Army BOIs;
the Royal Navy and Royal Air Force were taking steps to establish “pools of expertise”
from which Presidents could be selected.
193.  There were currently 100 open inquests. That was “below last summer’s
peak of 132, but still well above the backlog of 80 inquests that was judged to be
unacceptable in Spring 2006”. The use of pre‑inquest hearings, while a valuable
contribution to the inquest process, could introduce delays into the process. Coroners
often waited for access to the MOD’s reports, including BOI reports, before undertaking
an inquest. Sir Bill commented: “We must show coroners that we treat our investigations
as matters of urgency so that we might expect them to do the same.”
194.  On 9 April, Mr Ainsworth met senior officials and military officers to discuss Sir Bill’s
advice.112 Mr Ainsworth stated that he and Mr Browne remained of the view that there
needed to be a “step change in the way in which the BOI and inquest process was
handled, end‑to‑end”. He had already discussed the advice with Sir Bill, and agreed that
111 Minute Jeffrey to Minister(AF) [MOD], 29 February 2008, ‘Boards of Inquiry and Inquests’.
112  Minute PS/Min(AF) [MOD] to APS/Secretary of State [MOD], 11 April 2008, ‘Boards of inquiry
and Inquests’.
111
Previous page | Contents | Next page