Building better Inquiries: Reform, stakeholder engagement and utilising a trauma informed approach

Key lessons from Eversheds Sutherland’s 2025 Inquiries and Investigations conference

Public inquiries remain a cornerstone of democratic accountability, yet their current form faces increasing criticism. Lengthy timelines, spiralling costs, and a failure to implement recommendations have led to widespread calls for change. On 2 December 2025, at the Eversheds Sutherland Inquiries and Investigations annual conference, expert speakers explored: how inquiries can evolve to meet expectations; managing stakeholder engagement to deliver a successful inquiry; and the importance of conducting inquiries and investigations using a trauma-informed approach. A summary of each session is below.

Public Inquiry Reform

Expert speaker: Dr Emma Ireton

In the United Kingdom, as of October 2025, there are 25 public inquiries that are ongoing or announced, and, as such, the scrutiny on the cost and length of inquiries is heightened.

In September 2024, the House of Lords Statutory Inquiries Committee (“the Committee”) called for significant reform to the format of public inquiries and the way in which public inquiries are established and conducted. The Government considered the Committee’s report and agreed that reform was needed. This has led to widespread scrutiny of the public inquiry process in Westminster and a general consensus that something needs to be done to address concerns that are dominating the current debate around public inquiries.

Inquiries can be improved by focusing on both the structural framework of inquiries and the individuals operating within the inquiries themselves. Any change in the structural framework would be government led and would require changes to the Inquiries Act 2005 and the Inquiry Rules 2006. Equally, those responsible for the set up of inquiries can improve the process by enhancing knowledge sharing and ensuring best practice is observed.

In terms of potential reforms that lie ahead, of particular note are:

• A tighter control on costs, with a particular focus on the costs of lawyers which could be dealt with by imposing pre-agreed budgets with inquiry chairs that must be agreed at the outset of the inquiry.
• Greater use of non-statutory inquiries and independent panels, reserving full statutory inquiries only for the investigations that truly need them.
• Consideration of a new structural framework for UK public inquiries, potentially utilising a tiered system akin to New Zealand’s model.
• Replacing the inquiry final report with numerous interim reports that are published throughout the inquiry or smaller case studies.
• Establishing formal monitoring of the implementation of recommendations and carry out a top down, thematic review across inquiries. 

Stakeholder engagement in public inquiries

Expert Speakers: Rory Phillips KC, Emma Gargitter and Angharad Hurle

There are a number of key stakeholders within an inquiry, and each will have their own unique view of what makes a successful inquiry. We consider some of the key stakeholders below:

Victims and survivors

Most inquiries will have a group of victims and survivors who have campaigned tirelessly for years before the inquiry was established. It is of fundamental importance to prioritise this group and engage with them in a meaningful way from the outset. Often, inquiries will ensure early engagement by consulting on the terms of reference. This allows victims and survivors to feel involved early in the process and can help identify potential core participants. Despite this, consultation around the terms of reference can lead to an extension to the time taken to establish the inquiry and can, in some cases, lead to the broadening of terms of reference.

Core Participants

Core participants need to be engaged in the Inquiry process from the outset. Core participants have significant powers and, as such, can derail the work of an inquiry if they do not cooperate or if the relationship with the inquiry breaks down. In order to alleviate concerns of non-engagement by core participants, it is important to give all core participants regular and consistent updates as to the inquiry’s progress.

Media

The role of the media is very important in the success of an inquiry and can have a significant effect on the public’s perception of its work. Utilising a dependable, internal media team is of crucial importance for an inquiry to properly engage with the press and to ensure that information around the work of the inquiry is accurately disseminated to the public through the media. Conversely, if there are continually negative stories about a public inquiry this can have a devastating impact on the public’s perception and undermine a lot of valuable work.

Sponsors

Inquiries will be sponsored by a government department and this is an important, but delicate, relationship to manage. The management of this relationship falls mainly on the secretariat but, ultimately, sponsors are of fundamental importance as they can advocate for the inquiry to government and allow the inquiry’s voice to be heard.

A trauma-informed approach to inquiries and investigations

Expert Speakers: Rachel Spearing KC and Isabelle Mitchelll

Due to the nature of the matters that an inquiry investigates, there will inevitably be individuals engaging with the inquiry that have suffered trauma. Adopting a trauma-informed approach is essential for an inquiry or an investigation to elicit the most complete and accurate evidence, but most importantly, such an approach protects those affected from any further trauma.

The key principles that apply in a trauma informed approach are as follows:

• Safety – this means creating an environment where individuals feel physically and emotionally secure and safe. This means creating a physical environment where someone feels safe (e.g. interview locations that avoid re-traumatising witnesses), ensuring there is a clear safeguarding process in place, including how confidential information will be managed, and that inquiry staff are trained in active listening and empathetic communication.
• Trustworthiness – this means creating predictability and reliability in each interaction, ensuring trust is gained through consistent and clear communication with individuals.
• Choice – a fundamental characteristic of trauma is a loss of control for the individual that has suffered trauma. This control can be given back to the individual by offering them autonomy and reducing feelings of helplessness.
• Collaboration – collaborating to restore agency is also of vital importance in a trauma-informed approach and, without it, trust can be lost quickly. It involves finding opportunities to enable those affected to provide their input and be valued.
• Cultural considerations – it is important to recognise and respond to diverse backgrounds and experiences and understand that trauma and systemic inequalities could affect the quality of evidence given.

Crucially, a trauma-informed approach recognises that everyone responds to trauma in a different way and the key is flexibility, and listening and responding to an individual’s needs to ensure they can meaningfully participate in a process.

Engaging such an approach may take slightly longer or mean an amendment to timetabling or processes. However, taking these additional measures will allow an inquiry to improve processes, achieve best evidence and support participants, and truly build the trust of those involved.

For a deeper dive into Trauma Informed approach visit our most recent podcast in our Through the Inquisitors Lens Series: Through the inquisitor’s lens – Series 2, Episode 1: What does Trauma Informed actually look like

Should you require any further information in respect of any of the above, please contact: