It's one of the most shocking and bizarre stories in recent memory – a scandal involving the wrongful prosecution of hundreds of Post Office subpostmasters and subpostmistresses.

Since 2020, the scandal has been the subject of two inquiries: first, a non-statutory inquiry that lasted around a year, and second, a statutory inquiry for which witnesses could be compelled to give evidence. Both have been chaired by Sir Wyn Williams, a former High Court judge.

The inquiry is questioning senior Post Office figures, the tech firm Fujitsu and the British government. Its purpose is to find out who is accountable for what may amount to an extensive and long-running miscarriage of justice.

In this article, we look at the scandal, the inquiry and the nature of inquiries in general.

What is the Post Office scandal?

The Post Office had a malfunctioning IT system called Horizon, manufactured by tech firm Fujitsu. It kept showing up shortfalls in Post Office accounts. More than 900 sub-postmasters and postmistresses were prosecuted for stealing the money.

Between 1999 and 2015, the Post Office prosecuted 700 people – with another 283 cases brought by other bodies.

The scandal ruined lives. Some went to prison for false accounting and theft. Some killed themselves. Others used their own money to cover mistaken shortfalls, forced to do so by their Post Office contracts. Some faced bankruptcy. Marriages broke down. 

This catalogue of misery was made possible by faulty IT and covered up by the Post Office for many years.

The scandal has been known about for years. It has finally penetrated the mainstream thanks to the ITV dramatisation Mr Bates vs The Post Office.

In 2017, 555 sub-postmasters took legal action against the Post Office. They were paid a total of £58 million in compensation – however, much of this compensation was sunk into legal fees.

In autumn 2020, a non-statutory inquiry was launched. This became statutory in February 2021, meaning witnesses could now be compelled to give evidence.

Alongside this public inquiry, the Metropolitan Police is investigating the Post Office for fraud. The British government has said it will overturn all wrongful convictions and pay compensation. Victims simply need to sign a form stating their innocence.

At the time of writing (March 2024), the inquiry is still unfolding.

What is the inquiry?

The Post Office Horizon IT Inquiry is led by ex-High Court judge Sir Wyn Williams. His job is to create a public summary of the failings of IT and Post Office management that led to this extensive scandal.

The inquiry will gather evidence from:

• Previous and current subpostmasters and subpostmistresses
• Post Office Ltd
• UK Government Investment (UKGI), the portfolio of businesses owned by the government which includes Post Office Ltd
• The Department for Business and Trade (DBT)

Like all public inquiries, its aim is to ensure that no scandal of this kind will happen again. It aims to do this in two ways: first, by establishing who was accountable, and second, by making concrete recommendations to the government.

However, these recommendations aren't legally binding and the government is under no obligation to implement them.

What is the inquiry's timeline?

At the time of writing, the inquiry is still considering the key issues. Its hearings are scheduled to continue at Aldwych House in London until the end of July. The inquiry will then move on to Phase 7: "Current practice and procedure and recommendations for the future". This is pencilled in for September 2024.

All the inquiry's hearings are streamed with a three-minute delay on its YouTube channel.

How do public inquiries work?

Public inquiries exist to investigate issues of serious public concern. Famous examples include the Bloody Sunday Inquiry and the ongoing COVID-19 Inquiry. Their purpose is to establish facts, make recommendations and restore public confidence.

A public inquiry can be established only by a government minister. The decision to hold it is subject to judicial review. However, once set up it's run independently of the government. The Chair – typically a senior lawyer – has to be impartial. 

The terms of reference are the scope of the inquiry: what, in other words, the inquiry will consider. The Post Office inquiry's terms of reference can be found here.

Inquiries sometimes face criticism for being overlong and over-expensive. They're also not legally binding, which means the government doesn't have to implement any of their findings. However, they bring into public view the events and decisions that led to the matter of public concern in question.

What's the difference between a statutory and non-statutory inquiry?

The Post Office inquiry began life as a non-statutory inquiry before becoming statutory.

Non-statutory inquiries can be held in public or private. They're not bound by strict procedural rules and they don't have the power to compel witnesses to attend or produce documents.

Statutory inquiries, by contrast, must be held in public. Their procedures are formalised. Moreover, the Chair can compel witnesses to attend and produce evidence. This is a feature of statutory inquiries that hit the news when Boris Johnson refused to provide WhatsApp messages to the COVID-19 inquiry.

Final thoughts

Public inquiries are an established part of British political life. They aim to ensure that affected people's voices are heard, accountability is made publicly known and recommendations are made to minimise the chances of a similar scandal ever happening again.

If you're giving evidence to an inquiry, getting legal advice can be advisable. It means you have an experienced legal professional on hand to back you, help shape your narrative and deal with uncertainties. At a stressful time, this kind of support can be invaluable.

Are you looking for public inquiry representation? At Milners Solicitors, we have a team of expert lawyers who can fight your corner. Simply get in touch to book a free initial consultation.