Christie Allan

What is the purpose of a public inquiry?

Barrister Jason Beer KC, a specialist in public inquiries argues that the main function of a public inquiry is to address three key questions:

• What happened?
• Why did it happen and who is to blame?
• What can be done to prevent this from happening again?

Put simply, public inquiries tend to examine a disastrous set of circumstances or events. Some examples in recent years include the Grenfell Tower Inquiry, the UK & Scottish Covid Inquiries, the Post Office Horizon IT Inquiry, the UK & Scottish Child Abuse Inquiries, the Scottish Hospitals Inquiry, the Sheku Bayoh Inquiry, and most recently, the Scottish Inquiry into the 2005 murder of Emma Caldwell. A common thread in all inquiries is that they deal with matters of public concern.

The main purpose of an inquiry, therefore, is to investigate the timeline of events leading to the disastrous set of circumstances in issue and to seek to prevent reoccurrence in the future.

How do inquiries work?

A public inquiry is commissioned at the request of a government minister. It is inquisitorial in its nature (as opposed to adversarial) and can take one of two forms: non-statutory and statutory.

A non-statutory public inquiry does not take place under the authority an act of Parliament (such as the Inquiries Act 2005). Whilst this means that non-statutory inquiries are not afforded the same legal powers to compel witnesses to give evidence or to produce certain documentation, this can allow for greater flexibility as to procedure, with the inquiry having more freedom to define the boundaries in which it operates. For instance, a non-statutory inquiry can decide for itself what aspects or hearings are held in public. Some examples of non-statutory inquiries include investigations into public bodies, committees of privy councillors, and royal commissions.

In contrast, statutory public inquiries are commissioned under the Inquires Act and are governed by the Inquiry Rules 2006. These rules grant the inquiry the ability to require, by law, the production of documentation and to mandate the attendance of witnesses to give oral evidence; indeed, failure to comply with a request from the inquiry chair can be a criminal offence. Such powers can, therefore, greatly assist the inquiry in its ability to get to the core of the issues deemed to be of public importance, particularly as statutory inquiry hearings must be heard in public. This is, generally, of huge benefit to those who claim to be wronged by the actions pertaining to the set of events which are the focus of the inquiry, as there is usually a strong sense that such events (and the actors involved) must be laid bare for all to see.

Interestingly enough, the Post Office Horizon IT Inquiry began life as a non-statutory inquiry upon its commission in 2020 but quickly converted to a statutory inquiry in 2021 in order to benefit from the powers conferred specifically by statutory public inquiries, particularly in circumstances where there is an ongoing police investigation into possible criminal conduct by those involved.

Similarly, the Scottish grooming gangs inquiry has been commissioned by Education Secretary Jenny Gilruth as a statutory public inquiry. Indeed, the Scottish government confirmed last week that the inquiry will have the “fullest investigatory powers”. As per the Inquiries Act, this has been commissioned in circumstances where Ms Gilruth considers the events to be such that have caused, or are capable of, causing public concern.

Who is Professor Alexis Jay?

Professor Alexis Jay OBE is a British academic and visiting professor of the University of Strathclyde. Having worked in social work for over 30 years, she was an advisor to the Scottish government and subsequently set up the Scottish government’s Social Work Inspection Agency in 2005; she led the inquiry into child exploitation in Rotherham in 2014 (and authored the investigation’s report); and she chaired the Child Sexual Abuse Inquiry which published its report in 2022.

Most recently, in December 2025, she was appointed chair of the Scottish government’s national child sexual abuse and exploitation strategic group which is tasked with ingathering and reviewing evidence in relation to group-based child sexual abuse and exploitation in Scotland. This review is still ongoing (alongside a separate investigation conducted by Police Scotland), but it has established, at this stage, the need for a public inquiry in Scotland. Accordingly, this was confirmed in a statement to Holyrood last week by Ms Gilruth; it is the Scottish government’s intention that, given her experience, Professor Jay will, again, be appointed as inquiry chair. It may be that there are other panel members appointed to assist her in due course.

What will be investigated in this case?

The inquiry will run simultaneously to the inquiry already underway in England and Wales which is tasked with investigating how child grooming occurred in various areas of England and Wales, and with considering the actions of the police, local councils, social services and other agencies in failing to protect victims from harm and sexual exploitation.

The Scottish inquiry has been commissioned as a result of an increase in victims coming forward with their stories of grooming and abuse in Scotland, particularly whilst growing up in care. It was confirmed that the inquiry will ‘focus on the potential prevalence of group-based abuse now and in the most recent past’, it will ‘leave no stone unturned in the pursuit of justice and survivors of child sexual abuse’, and it will ‘examine the extent to which public authorities and other organisations effectively identify the risk of child exploitation’.

Previously, the Scottish government considered that there was not enough evidence to justify a public inquiry in Scotland, however, with more victims coming forward, the national strategic group and police investigation have since established the scale of grooming gangs also operating in Scotland (and not just south of the border) such as to justify the requirement for a public inquiry in Scotland.

As with any public inquiry, the terms of reference will be prescribed by the government, and, in this case, by Ms Gilruth specifically. The terms of reference will define the scope of the inquiry’s investigations and will determine the boundaries of the powers to be exercised by the inquiry under the Inquires Act. The specific issues to be considered by the inquiry may also be the subject of public consultation, or consultation with potential core participants, before being finalised.

It has, however, already been confirmed that the inquiry will operate distinctly from the existing Scottish Child Abuse Inquiry (such as to avoid duplication of work); rather it will have a broader remit which will be clearly defined to focus on group-based child abuse.

What might be achieved?

With the notable increase in the governments’ utilisation of public inquires in recent years (both in Scotland and in the UK), many wonder what can reasonably be achieved, particularly given the time and cost which is inevitably involved.

Confirmation of the establishment of a grooming gangs inquiry has, however, already had a profound impact for those affected. One mother of an alleged victim reported being brought to tears, having been “so overcome with emotion when it was announced”. For many, this inquiry will give victims a voice; it will seek to properly establish the truth of what occurred; and it will hold those responsible publicly to account.

Although the inquiry’s findings will not be legally binding, and although the inquiry is not capable of establishing liability (either in the civil or the criminal courts), as we have seen with other public inquiries, the findings can be a real catalyst for change and can go a long way in restoring public confidence that measures will be put in place to prevent reoccurrence. Indeed, we can expect that the inquiry will, primarily, make recommendations as to how we can better protect Scotland’s children from such harm and exploitation in the future.

Christie Allan in an associate at Livingstone Brown