Unacceptable Delay: Manchester Arena Attack Safety Reforms Stalled

More than three years after the final report detailing its findings was published, a number of key recommendations arising from the public inquiry into the Manchester Arena bombing atrocity have yet to be fully accepted or implemented by the Government. These outstanding recommendations primarily concern securing the attendance of potentially crucial witnesses to give evidence at major statutory public inquiries, and the measures to be taken if they refuse or simply disappear. Caroline Curry, the mother of 19-year-old Liam Curry, who was murdered in the attack alongside his teenage girlfriend Chloe Rutherford, described the situation as 'unbelievable and unacceptable' that these vital recommendations were still 'sitting on someone's desk'. She emphasized that 'huge failures' allowed the bomber's brother to leave the country after being compelled to give evidence, questioning the hold-up and urging for the protection of victims over the guilty.

The inquiry, chaired by Sir John Saunders, considered what happened at the Arena, what went wrong, and what could be done better in the future, delving into intense and often harrowing detail over 194 days of oral evidence. In total, three reports were issued, each containing numerous recommendations that bereaved families hoped would lead to tangible change and lasting security improvements, alongside criticisms of various organizations, companies, and individuals involved. The bombing, which occurred after an Ariana Grande concert at the Arena in May 2017, tragically claimed 22 lives and left hundreds of others injured.

In an update, the Government recently revealed that out of a total of 169 recommendations made by the inquiry, five have not been 'fully accepted'; instead, they are classed as 'partially accepted' though described as 'in progress'. The remaining 164 recommendations have been accepted in full. All five of the partially accepted recommendations are critical for ensuring the efficacy of future inquiries and are likely to prompt further debate on the monitoring and implementation of such crucial advice.

One of these five recommendations involves the creation of new powers under the Inquiries Act 2005. Specifically, these powers would enable authorities to prevent a material witness to an inquiry from putting themselves beyond the reach of existing powers to compel attendance. The ability to impose a 'short-term restriction' on a witness's passport, for instance, 'would have assisted' in cases like that of Ismail Abedi, the elder brother of bomber Salman Abedi, and his murderous brother's friend. Furthermore, the Home Office has been told to consider addressing difficulties in extradition for offenses under Section 35 of the Inquiries Act 2005, which makes it a criminal offence to obstruct or undermine a statutory public inquiry. Proposed amendments to the Act also include requiring a potential inquiry witness to participate in pre-hearing interviews and enabling 'pre-emptive enforcement proceedings for witnesses where there are reasonable grounds to believe that they will not co-operate'.

The case of Ismail Abedi starkly illustrates the need for these new powers. Despite being legally ordered by the chairman to attend the public inquiry, he failed to do so. The inquiry heard he was intercepted by police at Manchester Airport on August 28, 2021, while attempting to leave the country, and was questioned under the Terrorism Act. However, he managed to board a flight and departed the very next day. Counsel at the inquiry accused him of 'laughing in the face' of the process by 'fleeing'. Ismail Abedi's DNA was found on an item within a Nissan Micra car used by Salman Abedi and his brother Hashem to store explosives for the bomb. He was subsequently found guilty in his absence of failing to comply with a legal requirement to attend the inquiry and give evidence, with a warrant for his arrest believed to still be active. Sir John Saunders had explicitly stated his view that 'statutory powers available to the High Court capable of applying short-term restrictions on the movements of a citizen who is a material witness to an inquiry' should exist if there are fears of non-cooperation. He highlighted Ismail Abedi's unique position to assist the inquiry, given his first-hand knowledge of the home where the bombers grew up, especially after his parents, Ramadan Abedi and Samia Tabbal, also failed to cooperate.

Mrs. Curry, from South Shields, Tyne and Wear, articulated the families' enduring pain, stating: 'As we sit nine years from losing our children and over three years since the chairman closed down the Manchester Arena Inquiry, we find it unbelievable and unacceptable that still some of the recommendations from Sir John are sitting on someone's desk.' She emphasized that the 'huge failures' that allowed Ismail Abedi to leave this country and evade giving evidence would hopefully be prevented in the future if these recommendations were implemented. She termed his refusal to cooperate 'just another kick in the teeth' for the families and urged for the immediate implementation of these recommendations, or at least an explanation if they cannot be.

The Cabinet Office maintains that its 'dashboard', first published in March last year and updated recently, provides an overview of the inquiry's recommendations and their progress. The Government is currently considering a number of reforms, including the Public Office (Accountability) Bill, which aims to create a new duty of candour for public authorities and officials, alongside a new criminal offense for non-compliance. Potential changes to how inquiries operate are also under consideration. A Government spokesperson affirmed commitment to the recommendations, noting legislation passed to regulate healthcare at sporting and cultural events, with provider registration starting from September 2026, and an Event Healthcare Standard due later this year. However, the critical recommendations concerning witness attendance and enforcement remain a contentious point, underscoring the ongoing demand for full and timely implementation to provide closure and bolster the integrity of public inquiries.