Infected blood scandal: investigation to call for prosecution of those responsible

A long-awaited final report from the public inquiry into the tainted blood scandal is expected to prosecute those responsible, the Guardian has learned.

The official inquiry, set up in 2017 under Theresa May, will present its findings on Monday at a big moment for the victims and survivors of what is being described as the worst treatment disaster in the history of the NHS.

The investigation process, chaired by former judge Sir Brian Langstaff, has no scope to determine civil or criminal liability. However, it is believed the report will recommend prosecutions, possibly including current or former NHS figures.

About 3,000 people are believed to have died after more than 30,000 patients were infected with hepatitis C and HIV between the 1970s and the early 1990s as a result of contaminated products made from blood donated in the US.

In the wake of the report, the Treasury will announce a compensation package expected to be around £10 billion. The money to pay for this will come from loans.

Government officials say they expect any formal response on Monday to be limited as the release of the report will represent what one source called “a day for the victims and families.” After reviewing the report, next steps will be outlined in the coming days.

The compensation process will be led by Jeremy Hunt, the chancellor, who told the Sunday Times that this was the “worst scandal of my life”, and that the victims and their families were rightly angry at a generation of politicians, including him, for not take action to address it.

Hunt, who said he personally promised a constituent he would tackle the scandal in 2014, shortly before the man died of liver cancer linked to hepatitis C, said all politicians should be “deeply ashamed that it has taken so long ”.

Des Collins, a senior partner at Collins Lawyers who has acted as a lawyer and adviser to around 1,500 victims of the scandal and their families, said he had no idea what was in the closely guarded report but that recommendations for prosecution could well be were possible. .

“That wouldn’t surprise me at all,” he said. “The interim report criticized the entire system – individual, collective and systemic – because the degree of culpability can only point to manslaughter or criminal negligence.”

However, it remains to be seen whether any prosecutions will actually take place, and this could still mean a long wait for those affected. Corporate manslaughter in particular is a complex crime to prosecute. Since its introduction in 2008, there have been only a few dozen cases, of which only a handful have involved the NHS.

In a similar blood scandal in France, former Prime Minister Laurent Fabius and two of his ministers were charged with manslaughter. In 1999, Fabius and one minister were acquitted, and the other minister was found guilty but released. The director of the National Blood Center was sentenced to four years in prison.

Collins said differences in institutional culture and the legal system meant prosecutions were less likely to occur in Britain.

“Whether it will end like in France, with people in prison and very serious prosecutions, I suspect not, but I am happy to be proven wrong,” he said.

The investigation has produced evidence claiming that officials, the government and senior doctors were aware of the problem long before any action was taken to address the problem, and that the scandal was avoidable.

Collins thought the reason for what he sees as a government cover-up was: “when things started to look not as comfortable as they could be, everyone across the Channel looked at France and thought: “Dear me, they are If we prosecute, we will ensure that prosecution is impossible in this country.”

One of the biggest supporters of the corporate manslaughter case is Andy Burnham, a former health minister and mayor of Greater Manchester.

In 2022, he wrote to Conservative leadership candidates: “The Department of Health and the agencies for which it is responsible have been grossly negligent over the past five decades towards the safety of people in the haemophilia community, to the extent that there may even be of a case for asking the CPS (Crown Prosecution Service) to consider allegations of corporate manslaughter.”

Ben Harrison, head of public law at Milners, which represents key participants in the inquiry, said the fact the scandal had occurred in the 1970s and 1990s meant corporate manslaughter charges were unlikely.

He said: “First and foremost, corporate manslaughter is governed by legislation from 2007, which does not apply retroactively to a time when Crown immunity existed for such a crime; the time when so many were tragically and fatally infected.”

However, Collins said the fact that there have been casualty deaths since 2007 could mean corporate manslaughter is still possible, but the question is how a government agency such as the Department of Health should be punished.

Keir Starmer, the Labor leader, said it was a “mark of shame” that thousands of victims had died without compensation.

Writing in the Sunday Times, he said: “We must seize this moment to finally achieve justice. No more warm words, no more false dawns – the time has come for justice. I hope we see the right timelines and plans for delivery this week. I promise that Labor will work with the government to make this a reality – without delay.”