Previous page | Contents | Next page
16.4  |  Conclusions: Service Personnel
The use of redaction was not consistent between BOIs.
Not all redactions were justified. In some cases, whole passages were
redacted when only a few details were sensitive. In others, material had been
redacted when it was already in the public domain (for example, the name of a
Commanding Officer or pathologist).
In many cases, no attempt was made to explain the nature of the redacted
material to the reader.
There were some improvements in practice during the course of Op TELIC.
In general, the most recent BOI reports contained fewer redactions and were
easier to follow.
70.  The Inquiry recognises that some redactions will be required in almost all such
reports but recommends that the MOD take steps to ensure consistency of practice, in
line with the Information Commissioner’s guidance.11 Good practice seen by the Inquiry
includes:
including a clear statement of redaction policy at the start of a document;
providing a short overarching description of events described in text which has
been redacted;
adding a description which tells the reader the nature of the text has been
redacted (for example, ‘Personal medical information’);
assigning each individual a unique number or other cipher and attaching a
description of their role to it; and
leaving in ranks where names are redacted, so that command relationships
are clear.
71.  Many of the concerns shared by families in relation to the rigour of the BOI process
and its transparency could be addressed by adding an independent member to a BOI.
Inquests
72.  From January 2003, the MOD and the Home Office (the department then
responsible for coronial policy) worked with Mr Nicholas Gardiner, the Coroner for
Oxfordshire, to refine the arrangements for receiving UK military fatalities from Iraq.
The majority of fatalities were expected to be repatriated to RAF Brize Norton, which fell
within his area of responsibility.
73.  During those initial exchanges, Home Office officials highlighted a number of
issues that would later become problematic: the need for Mr Gardiner’s office to secure
additional resources (from Oxfordshire County Council) to cover the cases it was taking
11 Information Commissioner’s Office, Anonymisation: Managing Data Protection Risk Code of Practice,
November 2012.
163
Previous page | Contents | Next page