Sir John Chilcot defends Iraq Inquiry timetable as families protest

Sir John Chilcot has issued a statement saying he understands “the anguish” of families of killed British soldiers awaiting the delayed Iraq Inquiry report.

The inquiry started work in 2009 and held its final hearings in 2011, but the final report has been delayed due to the process of “Maxwellisation”, whereby those criticised in the report are given a chance to respond prior to publication.

Earlier this month, lawyers for 29 families of British soldiers who died in Iraq threatened to bring a case to the High Court if the report was not published by the end of 2015.

In his statement, Sir John writes: “I should firstly like to reiterate that my colleagues and I understand the anguish of the families of those who lost their lives in the conflict.

“We take the responsibility we were given as an independent Inquiry extremely seriously, and understand the need for Government, Parliament and the public to see our report as soon as possible.”

Defending the process of the inquiry, he added: “Individuals have not been given an open-ended timescale and Maxwellisation is not a process of negotiation. The Inquiry has remained in control of its deadlines throughout the process. In some cases, the response sent to us required detailed and complex analysis which has taken time.

“The Maxwellisation process is essential not only to the fairness but also the accuracy and completeness of our report. It has already led, for example, to the identification of government documents which had not been submitted to the Inquiry and which have in some cases opened up new issues.

“We expect to receive the last responses to our Maxwellisation letters shortly. That will allow us to complete our consideration of the responses, to decide what further work will be needed, and to provide the Prime Minister and thus Parliament and the public with a timetable for the publication of our work.

“Lastly, as has been reported, we have received a letter from lawyers acting for a group of families. I can confirm that, after careful thought, we have responded to the points they raised. I don’t intend to comment on the substance of that response and such letters are not normally published.”