Public inquiry: Difference between revisions

A '''public inquiry''', also known as a '''tribunal of inquiry''', '''government inquiry''', or simply '''inquiry''', is an official [[review]] of events or actions ordered by a government body. In many [[common law]] countries, such as the [[United Kingdom]], [[Republic of Ireland|Ireland]], [[Australia]] and [[Canada]], such a '''publican inquiry''' differs from a [[Royalroyal Commissioncommission]] in that a public inquiry accepts evidence and conducts its hearings in a more public forum and focuses on a more specific occurrence. Interested members of the public and organisations may not only make (written) evidential submissions, as is the case with most inquiries, butand also listen to oral evidence given by other parties.

Typical events for a public inquiry are those that cause multiple deaths, such as public transport crashes or [[mass murders]]. In addition, in the [[United Kingdom|UK]], the [[Planning Inspectorate]], an agency of the Department for [[Communities and Local Government]], routinely holds public inquiries into a range of major and lesser land use developments, including highways and other transport proposals.

[[Advocacy group]]s and [[Opposition (politics)|opposition]] political parties are likely to ask for public inquiries for all manner of issues. The government of the day typically only accedes to a fraction of these requests. The political decision whether to appoint a public inquiry into an event was found to be dependent on several factors. The first is the extent of media coverage of the event; those that receive more media interest are more likely to be inquired. Second, since the appointment of a public inquiry is typically made by government ministers, events that involve allegations of blame on the part of the relevant minister are less likely to be investigated by a public inquiry.<ref>[http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayAbstract?fromPage=online&aid=7834671&fileId=S0007123410000049 Sulitzeanu-Kenan, R. 2010. Reflection in the Shadow of Blame: When do Politicians Appoint Commissions of Inquiry?, ''British Journal of Political Science'' 40(3): 613-634] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220228182440/https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/british-journal-of-political-science/article/abs/reflection-in-the-shadow-of-blame-when-do-politicians-appoint-commissions-of-inquiry/BC331E2B892D523563FE2EACDB29FA9A |date=28 February 2022 }}.</ref> Third, a public inquiry generally takes longer to report and costs more on account of its public nature. Thus, whenWhen a government refuses a public inquiry on some topic, it is usually on at least one of these grounds.

The conclusions of the inquiry are delivered in the form of a written report, given first to the government, and soon after published to themade public. The report willReports generallyusually make recommendations to improve the quality of government or management of public organisations in the future. RecentA studies2016 havestudy shownfound that the reports of public inquiries are not effective in changing public opinion regarding the event in question.<ref>[http://aas.sagepub.com/content/48/1/3.abstract Sulitzeanu-Kenan, R & Y. Holzman-Gazit. 2016. Form and Content: Institutional Preferences and Public Opinion in a Crisis Inquiry, ''Administration & Society'' 48(1): 3-30] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160223180849/http://aas.sagepub.com/content/48/1/3.abstract |date=23 February 2016 }}.</ref> Moreover,Empirical studies do not find support for the claim that appointing a public inquiry leads to a decline in media attention to the inquired issue.<ref>{{cite journal |last=Sulitzeanu-Kenan |first=R. |date=1 October 2007 |title=Scything the grass: agenda-setting consequences of appointing public inquiries in the UK. A longitudinal analysis |url=https://bristoluniversitypressdigital.com/view/journals/pp/35/4/article-p629.xml |url-access=subscription |journal=Policy & Politics |volume=35 |issue=4 |pages=629–650 |doi=10.1332/030557307782452985 |access-date=15 August 2022 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220815000000/https://bristoluniversitypressdigital.com/view/journals/pp/35/4/article-p629.xml |archive-date=15 August 2022}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last=Sulitzeanu-Kenan |first=R. |date=30 June 2020 |title=Blame Avoidance and Crisis Inquiries |url=https://oxfordre.com/view/10.1093/acrefore/9780190228637.001.0001/acrefore-9780190228637-e-1591 |url-access=subscription |journal=Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Politics |volume= |issue= |pages= |doi=10.1093/acrefore/9780190228637.013.1591 |isbn=978-0-19-022863-7 |access-date=15 August 2022 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220815183131/https://oxfordre.com/view/10.1093/acrefore/9780190228637.001.0001/acrefore-9780190228637-e-1591 |archive-date=15 August 2022}}</ref> Public inquiry reports appear to enjoy public trust only when they are critical of thea government, and tend to lose credibility when they find no fault on the part of the government.<ref>{{cite journal|doi=10.1111/j.1467-9299.2006.00605.x | volume=84 | year=2006 | journal=Public Administration | pages=623–653 | last1 = Sulitzeanu-Kenan | first1 = Raanan| title=If They Get It Right: An Experimental Test of the Effects of the Appointment and Reports of UK Public Inquiries | issue=3 }}</ref>

{{Mainexcerpt|Public inquiries in the Republic of Ireland}}