|
|
|||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
News Search
|
|
26-8-2003 Scotsman The Hutton Inquiry: Big Questions Remain By Gethin Chamberlain TWO weeks into the Hutton inquiry, another six to go. Already, most of the main players have been obliged to take their place in the witness box to face the questions of James Dingemans, QC, senior counsel to the inquiry, and the odd interjections of Lord Hutton. For many, it has been an uncomfortable time, and Messrs Blair, Hoon and Scarlett have yet to face the music. But the really hard questions may well be yet to come when they are recalled for cross-examination by lawyers assembled by the government and the BBC as each side in this desperate fight to clear their names attempts to hammer home whatever advantage they believe they have gained. Andrew Gilligan, the BBC's defence and diplomatic correspondent on the Radio 4 Today programme, cannot be looking forward to a recall. He must be hoping that no-one asks him to demonstrate how it is possible to take contemporaneous typed notes on a personal organiser during a casual conversation with a government weapons expert in the Charing Cross Hotel. He has produced what is said to be a transcript of his notes from the conversation, to the amazement of those familiar with the difficulties of using such a device for note-taking. He also faces questions about Dr Kelly's recollections of their conversation, in which the scientist recalled that Mr Gilligan used a notepad and paper. The BBC man has already explained that it might be possible to confuse a small computer with a pen and paper: cross-examination on this point should be interesting. Alastair Campbell, too, is unlikely to escape a recall. Neither man had much time for the other, and the BBC's lawyers will be keen to play on the welter of letters of complaint to the BBC from Mr Campbell as proof that there was a private agenda to the government's refusal to simply rise above the Today programme's claims about No 10's alleged attempts to insert bogus intelligence into its dossier on Iraqi weapons of mass destruction. He also faces more questions on how journalists were pointed in the direction of Dr Kelly as they hunted for the source of Mr Gilligan's story. Geoff Hoon, although he has yet to be questioned by Mr Dingemans and Lord Hutton, cannot be convinced that he will not be called back. His role in the decision to make Dr Kelly's identity public is seen as crucial to the inquiry, and he will be required to deal with complaints from Dr Kelly's widow, Janice, about a perceived attempt by the government to smear the dead scientist. Mr Blair might be expected to escape a second grilling, but even one appearance could be uncomfortable. It has emerged he was warned the naming of Dr Kelly would place the weapons expert under more pressure and there has already been a substantial amount of evidence to suggest that the Prime Minister was heavily implicated in the decision to out Dr Kelly. If the BBC is hoping Mr Gilligan will take the heat off the corporation, it is likely to be disappointed. Gavyn Davies, the BBC chairman, must explain why governors backed their reporter when they knew his story was flawed. It should be an interesting six weeks.
|
|
||||
|
................................................................................................................. Copyright ©2004 Gethin Chamberlain. All rights reserved. |
|||||||
