MoD ‘dishonest' to call 1994 Chinook crash an accident, say families
All 25 passengers – made up of personnel from MI5, the Royal Ulster Constabulary and the British Army – were killed, along with the helicopter's four crew members.
The families of those who died said earlier this month that they were beginning legal action against the Ministry of Defence (MoD) for not ordering a public inquiry.
They want a High Court judge to be able to review information which they say was not included in previous investigations, and which they believe will shed new light on the airworthiness of the helicopter.
The families, who have coalesced into the Chinook Justice Campaign, said failing to order a public inquiry is a breach of the UK Government's human rights obligations.
An MoD spokesperson said: 'The Mull of Kintyre crash was a tragic accident, and our thoughts and sympathies remain with the families, friends and colleagues of all those who died.
'We have received a pre-action protocol letter from the Chinook Justice Campaign and are considering our response. Therefore, it would be inappropriate to comment further.'
Solicitor Mark Stephens, who is representing the families, said: 'The statements issued by the Ministry of Defence in recent days are so blatantly at odds with the facts as we now know them that they have caused immense upset to the families and cast a further cruel and disgraceful shadow on this ongoing travesty of justice.
'We know that the RAF helicopter carrying the 29 service personnel who were killed, serving their country, had been grounded because of fatal flaws in the software on board.
'For the MoD to claim that this was a 'tragic accident' flies in the face of the facts and is blatantly and disgracefully at odds with the truth.
'It is nothing short of dishonest, deceitful and disingenuous and we demand a retraction.'
The families have also called for the release of documents that were sealed at the time of the crash for 100 years, something revealed in a BBC documentary last year.
The MoD has said that records held in the National Archives contain personal information and early release of those documents would breach their data protection rights.
Mr Stephens said: 'For the Government to believe that data protection laws were designed to protect someone who is living – and who may have made a dreadful decision that night – rather than the truth emerging over 29 service personnel who were killed in an unairworthy aircraft, is a total abomination.
'This decision must be overturned, these files must be seen by a judge, and we will fight this in court if necessary.'
Niven Phoenix, a commercial pilot whose father Ian was one of the senior RUC officers killed in the crash, said: 'This was about as far from a tragic accident as you could get. Locking the files away until we are all dead proves there is a cover-up about something.
'The MoD's statement that these files have been sealed to protect third party interests is yet another disingenuous, distasteful and outright dishonest assertion designed to hide the truth using data protection laws which only came into force in the UK long after the crash.
'The Government would prefer for all the children of the Chinook victims to die like their parents rather than provide access, answers and take accountability for past mistakes. This is not the duty of candour promised by Keir Starmer in his election manifesto.'
Following the crash, the Chinook's pilots, Flight Lieutenants Richard Cook and Jonathan Tapper, were accused of gross negligence, but this verdict was overturned by the UK Government 17 years later, following a campaign by the families.
A subsequent review by Lord Philip set out 'numerous concerns' raised by those who worked on the Chinooks, with the MoD's testing centre at Boscombe Down in Wiltshire declaring the Chinook Mk2 helicopters 'unairworthy' prior to the crash.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Guardian
42 minutes ago
- The Guardian
Over £300m given to English councils to help house Ukrainian refugees unspent
More than £300m given to English councils to help Ukrainian refugees into accommodation has not been spent, while thousands of them face homelessness. Freedom of information requests to 150 councils in England, shared with the Guardian, identified that £327m – about a third of the £1bn budget – was still sitting in council bank accounts more than three years after Russia invaded Ukraine. Most of the funds councils have spent have been used to pay staff and partner organisations. Only £22m has been spent on temporary accommodation for Ukrainians and £15m to help them into private rented accommodation. Many Ukrainians struggle to find accommodation in the private rented sector because of the need to provide a deposit, something councils can help with but which some Ukrainians say in practice can be slow, bureaucratic and difficult to access. Finding a UK guarantor can also be difficult and those unable to speak English struggle to negotiate with landlords. British Red Cross research earlier this year found that Ukrainian refugees were more than twice as likely as British people to experience homelessness. Using data from across Britain, the Red Cross research estimates that more than 6,400 Ukrainian families will experience some form of homelessness this year. Baljeet Nijjhar of UKrainian Refugee Help, who obtained and collated the FoI data, said: 'Local councils are allocated thousands of pounds per Ukrainian arrival, yet the guests we support seem to struggle to access this directly when in need. 'The most common issue is inability to rent privately and people often don't know anyone in the UK who could act as a guarantor, so it's the local council that they must rely on here to solve this problem. 'Our research shows that many councils have significant levels of funds left, but have helped very few people to rent, whereas others have demonstrated a 'can do', proactive approach and have helped significantly more.' She called for targets to be set for council spending of government money earmarked for Ukrainians and for interventions from Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG) to get more people into private rented accommodation more quickly. Solomiia Baranets, a Ukrainian refugee and trainee lawyer who runs the Ukrainian Employment Integration Project to help people find jobs, said she had struggled to get housing for herself and her family and was trying to help others in the same situation. 'The status of Ukrainians here is not stable. I have two children and a disabled mother. I contacted more than 50 landlords. They were very polite but they never came back to me. The council did not help me. I had to help myself.' Stan Beneš, the director of Opora, an organisation that supports Ukrainians in rebuilding their lives, said: 'The quality of council support for Ukrainians is often a postcode lottery. Since the Ukraine visa schemes began, councils have had significant discretion over how to use government-allocated funds, and whether to top them up from their own budgets. Sign up to First Edition Our morning email breaks down the key stories of the day, telling you what's happening and why it matters after newsletter promotion 'Differences in council structures, resources and priorities across the UK have widened the gap. While some Ukrainians still receive a high level of support, an ever-growing number are struggling. These barriers are further compounded by the trauma of war and forced relocation.' Dr Krish Kandiah, the director of the Sanctuary Foundation, which provides support for Ukrainian refugees, praised the British public for their hospitality. 'It is now vital that the UK builds on that generosity by ensuring that every Ukrainian has the security and dignity of their own front door,' he said. An MHCLG spokesperson said: 'Councils are given a set amount of funding per arrival and it's not unusual for this to be spent over the duration of their time in the UK rather than all at once. Ultimately councils are best placed to understand the needs of their local communities and explain how this money is spent.'
The National
an hour ago
- The National
MoD slammed after ministers not told about US troops on Scottish soil
Last year, it emerged that a new base in Lossiemouth, in Moray, would host American Poseidon P8 anti-submarine spy and war planes. When the site opened in May 2024, it became the first time the US military had a presence in Scotland since the end of the Cold War. The Scottish Greens raised concerns that the move signalled the UK Government forging 'closer military relations' with Donald Trump while he is cosying up to Russian president Vladimir Putin. Stop the War said that the decision to allow US troops to be stationed in Scotland without consulting Holyrood should be 'condemned'. READ MORE: Police Scotland 'breaching human rights to subdue Palestine protests' The National lodged a Freedom of Information (FOI) request with the Scottish Government for any correspondence from the MoD regarding the decision to allow US troops to have a presence in Scotland. 'The Scottish Government does not hold the information you have requested, as matters relating to Defence are reserved to the UK Government,' the response from an official in the Veteran's Unit said. 'As a result, this information is not shared with the Scottish Government. As such, I hereby provide you with formal notice under section 17(1) of FOISA that the Scottish Government does not have the information you have requested.' The MoD previously refuted any suggestion there was a US military base in Scotland, following an investigation by the Ferret. Instead they insisted it was a US 'presence' with a 'US naval detachment' at Lossiemouth. The US navy helped to fund the construction of the new facility where its war planes will be housed, and are set to work alongside UK aircraft. Arianne Burgess, the Scottish Greens MSP who represents the area covering Lossiemouth, said: "A lot of local people will be shocked by these revelations and with the lack of any announcement or basic information. (Image: AP) "The last thing we should be doing is forging even closer military relations with Donald Trump, especially at a time when he is cozying up to Putin and arming genocide against the people of Gaza. "It's time for the Ministry of Defence to level with people and come clean about its arrangements. "With Keir Starmer seemingly joined at the hip with the White House it's more important than ever that Scotland forges its own foreign policy based on human rights, peace and a rejection of the values of Donald Trump." A spokesperson for Stop the War said that there should be 'no US troops or weapons on UK soil'. 'They do not make us any safer from the threats that the warmonger politicians are so enthusiastic about talking up in order to justify increases in defence spending while cutting welfare and hitting the most vulnerable in society the hardest,' they added. READ MORE: SNP councillor hits back at 'lie' he defected to Reform UK 'That the MoD has stationed US troops at RAF Lossiemouth without consultation with Holyrood is of course to be condemned, but comes as no surprise given the Westminster government also allowed US nuclear weapons to be placed at RAF Lakenheath in Suffolk without any transparency or debate in Parliament." A spokesperson for the MoD said: "The United States is the UK's closest defence and security partner. As NATO allies, we regularly conduct exercises and operations together to support European and global security. "Defence supports hundreds of thousands of high-skilled jobs across the UK, including over 26,000 in Scotland." US troops had been based in Scotland since the 1960s, including nuclear armed submarines at Holy Loch on the Clyde. After the Cold War ended in 1991, US forces left Holy Loch in 1992. They then left Machranish on the Mull of Kintyre, where nuclear mines were housed, in 1995, and Edzell in Aberdeenshire, a signals intelligence network, in 1997. It comes amid concerns that Trump is in favour of a Russian land grab to end the war in Ukraine, following a meeting with Putin in Alaska. Following the summit, the US President suggested he wants to move straight to a full peace deal, rather than negotiating a ceasefire first. The shift in Trump's position appears to echo the Russians' refusal to agree to a ceasefire before engaging in peace talks. Ukrainian president Vlodymyr Zelenskyy is set to visit the US on Monday, and is set to take UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer and top European leaders with him to DC for crunch talks with the US President.
Sky News
an hour ago
- Sky News
Jimmy Lai's son says his father will 'most likely die in jail' unless UK govt intervenes
The bustle still exists in Hong Kong, but its tone is not the same. A city once famous for its protest, now simply doesn't dare. Just a few years ago it would have been hard to imagine a court case as high-profile as that of Jimmy Lai without at least a handful of supporters and placards. But as closing arguments began in the trial of one of the city's most well-known pro-democracy figures, there was not a hint of dissent in sight. Now Lai's son, Sebastian, who advocates on his behalf, has said that the treatment of his father will have dire implications for Hong Kong"as a a financial centre", and has warned the British government (of which Lai is a citizen), that if it fails to act "my father is most likely going to die in jail". Jimmy Lai has been described as the most famous prisoner of conscience anywhere in the world. He is an iconic figure within Hong Kong's pro-democracy movement and is one of the most high-profile people to be charged under Hong Kong's controversial national security law. The self-made millionaire, lifelong critic of Beijing, and the owner of pro-democracy newspaper Apple Daily is accused of colluding with foreign forces and publishing seditious material. After a five-month adjournment, closing arguments in his trial will get under way in earnest this week. There is a sense here that authorities have found this trial a little tricky to resolve. How to handle an elderly man who some believe has become emblematic of a cause? How to balance significant international criticism with the city's desire to assure the world it is just, fair and back open for business? His family and lawyers believe this partly explains the multiple, lengthy adjournments. Lai's son, Sebastian, has spent years advocating for his father from London. He has not seen him in nearly five years. "The worst-case scenario is that he dies in prison," he says. It is a legitimate concern. Lai has spent over 1,600 days in solitary confinement. He is 77 years old and diabetic. Indeed, on Friday, the first day of the resumed court activity was taken up by discussions about his health and the court was then adjourned so he could be fitted with a heart rate monitor. "In Hong Kong, it's a concrete cell which gets up to 30, 40C and he bakes in there essentially," says Sebastian. "So we're incredibly worried about him, and all of this in the last four years was aimed to break him, to break his spirit." 'If he dies, that's a comma on Hong Kong' Sebastian insists his father's death would not just be a personal tragedy, but a huge problem for both the Hong Kong authorities and Beijing's government. "You can't tell the world you have the rule of law, the free press and all these values that are instrumental to a financial centre and still have my father in jail," he says. "And if he dies, that's it, that's a comma on Hong Kong as a financial centre." It's criticism that the authorities in Hong Kong are acutely aware of. Indeed, the government there has insisted in a statement that the city's "correctional facilities are humane and safe" and said that claims to the contrary are merely "external forces and anti-China media" working to "glorify criminal behaviour and exert pressure on the courts". But Lai is also a British citizen and there is a sense his family believes successive UK governments have failed in their duty to support him. Petitioning is a journey Sebastain describes as "heartbreaking". "It's time to put actions behind words," he says. "Without that, my father is most likely going to die in jail." It's criticism that the authorities in Hong Kong are acutely aware of, the regional government claimed in a statement that "external forces and anti-China media" are actively working to "distort the truth, blatantly discredit the judicial system, in an attempt to glorify criminal behaviour". Some believe the Lai trial is one of the final outstanding affairs in the wake of the crackdown on Hong Kong's huge 2019 pro-democracy protests, actions the Beijing-backed authorities say were necessary to restore order and stability. When you spend time in this city, it's hard not to conclude those efforts have been remarkably successful. Any signs of dissent are now extremely hard to track down. Tiny slogans graffitied in hidden places, a few independent bookstores still stocking political titles or young people choosing to not spend money in Hong Kong where possible is about as much as exists. Meanwhile, the mainland Mandarin language is more commonly heard in the streets and slogans and banners extolling causes favoured by Beijing are not hard to find. In today's Hong Kong, stances are staked in quiet acts of compassion, such as committed visits to friends behind bars. 'Don't ever second-guess Beijing' It's on one of these trips we accompany Emily Lau, a former Hong Kong lawmaker and pro-democracy supporter. "It's very important to show the people inside that they have not been forgotten," she explains, as she climbs into one of Hong Kong's iconic red taxis. "It's my way of showing my support." She is visiting Dr Helena Wong, a fellow member of the Democratic Party, and one of the so-called '47' - 47 activists tried together for conspiracy to commit subversion. Her key offence was standing in an unofficial primary election. Lau is upbeat as we chat, but also frank about the state of democracy in her city. "It's very difficult. Now it seems you cannot demonstrate, you cannot march, you cannot petition," she says. "And if you do post something online or some posts, you have to be very careful about what you say. "I will never say we are finished, no, but right now, of course, it's very difficult." We wait outside for her as she visits Dr Wong. She reports back that she's in good spirits and was happy to see her friend. Their political party is in the process of disbanding, like every other pro-democracy group. The pressure has simply become too much, and she fears this isn't the end. "Don't ever second-guess Beijing," she says. "Don't try." Indeed, the only political groups able to continue are those who at least tacitly support Beijing and its laws. 'Not as bad as people think' Ronnie Tong runs a think tank called Path of Democracy, which also sponsors people to run for office. He bills it as a moderate force, but in reality, it has supported the National Security Law and all measures used to crack down on protesters. "I don't think it is as bad as people think," he says. "The only thing they cannot say is to advocate succession or separatism." I ask if using the word 'democracy' in the group's title feels a little ironic, given his voice is likely only permitted insofar as it does not criticise Beijing. "No, I don't think so," he replies. "People have to understand that politics is also about personal relationships." That will likely not wash with many people here, but right now most feel they have no choice but to keep a low profile or move on. The Lai trial is only one small part of Hong Kong's story, but it's a reflection of the rapid change here and a snapshot of a city adjusting.
