- Lord Hutton's final conclusions into the circumstances
surrounding the death of Dr David Kelly were one-sided and were not supported
by all the evidence given to his inquiry, lawyers said yesterday.
-
- There was also disquiet among the legal profession that
a senior and respected judge had been used as a political tool to settle
what had begun as a dispute between the BBC and the Government. Some of
the most serious criticism was made by Alan Levy QC, who chaired the influential
1991 "Pindown" inquiry into the abuse of children in local authority
homes.
-
- He said: "I was surprised by his conclusions because
I do think it was rather one-sided. I expected it to be critical of Whitehall
and the Government because of the evidence submitted. I think whitewash
might be too strong but I'm uneasy that criticism was not attached to other
parties. It seems the BBC has every reason to cry foul."
-
- Louise Christian, a solicitor representing some of the
British Guantanamo detainees, said she was astonished how Lord Hutton had
"explained away" the 15 changes Alastair Campbell had asked to
be made to the dossier. "This was much more than a subconscious influence
being exercised."
-
- Ms Christian, who has appeared at several inquiries chaired
by judges, described Hutton's report as "very badly written, reproducing
large chunks of evidence that did not marry up to the evidence".
-
- Mr Levy, whose inquiry was set up by the Department of
Health and heard 75 days of evidence from 100 witnesses, added: "I
would have liked the terms of reference to have been widened to take account
of whether we rightly went to war. Was the intelligence there for people's
lives to be put at risk?"
-
- Matthias Kelly QC, a former chairman of the Bar, said
the time had come to end the custom of making sitting judges chairmen of
politically sensitive public inquiries. "I am far from convinced it's
a very good idea for serving judges to conduct such inquiries because they
are highly politicised. It would be far better if the Government used retired
judges on such occasions." But he said the conclusions drawn by Lord
Hutton were a matter for him and were ones on which he did not wish to
comment.
-
- One retired law lord said some of these issues would
be taken up during a House of Lords debate this month. "I think a
number of retired judges will want to raise concerns about the way the
inquiry came about," he said.
-
- Peter Carter QC, chairman of the Bar's human rights committee,
said he was "rather horrified" when he heard the judge's conclusions.
But he said for the first time the public were able to hear the evidence
about how the "information was manipulated and how governments operate".
He added: "Lord Hutton's final conclusions are persuasive but not
definitive."
-
- He also said he thought the inquiry's terms were too
narrowly drawn. "The issue lawyers wanted addressed was the legitimacy
of going to war." But he said he made no criticism of Lord Hutton's
conduct of the inquiry, which he said was fair and open.
-
- Stephen Irwin QC, the chairman of the Bar, said Lord
Hutton was "professionally and judicially very highly regarded"
and reached his conclusions after hearing all the evidence, some of which
was given in private. He asked: "What do think the media would be
staying about his standing if he had delivered a judgment against the Government?"
-
- © 2004 Independent Digital (UK) Ltd
-
- http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/politics/story.jsp?story=486354
|
