A very polite, well-drafted, necessary request. Let’s hope the response is as clear and as swift in recognition of the fact that any more damage to the CSA Inquiry through this appointment will start to reach further than the NY Times. The basis of when Woolf will ‘upgrade’ to a public inquiry on a statutory basis as asked at the HASC? When it gets “sticky.” Doesn’t seem like the most well-prepared or thoughtful consideration of the question. http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/24/world/europe/head-of-inquiry-into-child-abuse-in-britain-faces-a-legal-challenge.html?_r=1
No shame in standing down
We write to suggest that it is time for you to review your position as chair of the child sex abuse inquiry and to resign. There is no shame in that. It sounds, from your session with the Home Affairs Select Committee, as though the first approach from the Home Secretary was brief. Now you know more about the job and have considered it in the light of your other commitments and your expertise (and that you may be nearly 70 when it is finished), you can honestly say you know you are not the appropriate person for the role.
Upon your resignation we urge you to recommend the following to the Home Secretary: first, that she appoints a specialist family law High Court (or higher) judge to take your place; secondly, that this inquiry is now set up formally under Inquiries Act 2005; and…
View original post 499 more words