Core Participant status – to CP or not to CP…

One of the first questions a client or potential client affected by the announcement of a public inquiry is likely to ask is whether they should apply for core participant status. So what is it, who might meet the test and do they want it?

What is a core participant and what rights come with core participant designation?

A core participant is any person (an individual or a legal entity) designated as such by the Chair of an Inquiry under rule 5 of the Inquiry Rules 2006. It is not necessary to have core participant status in order for a person or organisation who has been affected by or involved in the issues falling within the terms of reference to engage with an inquiry. For example, a person does not need to be a core participant in order to provide evidence to the Inquiry and access to information is not restricted to core participants – it is now commonplace for public inquiries to publish written and oral evidence and documents referred to in oral evidence on their website. Being a core participant, however, enables meaningful participation in a number of tangible ways. Core participants will generally:

1. be provided with disclosure of evidence which the Chair considers to be relevant to the Terms of Reference;
2. be able to make opening and closing statements at certain hearings;
3. be able to suggest lines of questioning to be pursued by Counsel to the Inquiry;
4. be able to apply to the Chair to ask questions of witnesses during the hearings;
5. be permitted to have input in relation to composition of any expert groups and to suggest questions to be asked of the experts; and
6. be provided, prior to publication, with a copy of the report (or any interim report) which is to be published.

The test

The Chair may designate a person as a core participant at any time during the course of the inquiry, provided that person consents to being so designated. This may be in response to an application from a would-be core participant or where the Chair invites a person to become a core participant and they accept this invitation. Either way, under rule 5(2) the Chair must consider the following when deciding on core participant designation:

Whether –

1. the person played, or may have played, a direct and significant role in relation to the matters to which the Inquiry relates;
2. the person has a significant interest in an important aspect of the matters to which the Inquiry relates; or
3. the person may be subject to explicit or significant criticism during the Inquiry proceedings or in the report, or in any interim report.

It is worth bearing in mind that one of the big challenges for many inquires is limiting the number of core participants so that the inquiry does not become too unwieldly and cost inefficient. There are, of course, disclosure and other costs to the inquiry for each core participant and the Chair must have regard to the need to avoid any unnecessary cost under section 17(3) of the Inquiries Act 2005. Not all those who apply for core participant status will have it granted. Where it is granted, there will be a secondary question of whether core participants with similar interests should be represented by the same recognised legal representative.

The advantages and disadvantages of CP status

The advantages of having these rights depend on the client. For example, for an individual negatively affected by the events at the heart of an inquiry, it makes it easier for their voice to be heard. For an organisation which was involved in the events being investigated by an inquiry, it provides an opportunity to ensure that the picture gained by the inquiry is full and fair. For an individual whose conduct is being questioned, it makes it easier for those representing them to ensure fairness to their client.

The disadvantages? The main downside is cost. In particular, the consequence of being provided with disclosure needs to be considered. A proportionate strategy for dealing with this disclosure will be key and should be considered early on. Similar considerations apply to representation at the hearings, which might continue for months or years, depending on the inquiry.

The headline advice

• Give early consideration to whether a client or potential client should be applying for core participant status and consider seeking specialist advice at this stage;
• Look out for the inquiry’s statement of approach on core participant applications and any deadlines for applications;
• Be realistic about the need to develop a proportionate strategy for participation in the inquiry. The initial cost of doing so will pay dividends in the long run.

---

Authors

Emma Price

Call 2007

Related areas

Inquests

---

Public Inquiries

---