Claim against MI5 is ‘the next step’ in equalizing Arena survivors, tribunal said

Legal action against MI5 is the “next step” in bringing justice to dozens of survivors and people affected by the Manchester Arena attack, a tribunal has said.

More than 200 people affected by the bombings have brought a case against the security forces at the Investigatory Powers Tribunal (IPT), claiming that the failure to take “appropriate measures” to prevent the atrocities was a breach of their human rights.

Investigations found that the bombing could have been prevented if MI5 had acted on key intelligence received in the months before the attack.

In the wake of the findings, the agency’s director general, Ken McCallum, also expressed deep regret that such intelligence had not been obtained.

Two pieces of information about suicide bomber Salman Abedi were assessed by the security service at the time as not related to terrorism.

But inquiry chairman Sir John Saunders said, after hearing from MI5 witnesses during the hearings into the May 2017 atrocity, which killed 22 people and injured hundreds of others, he believed this was not an “accurate picture” yielded.

Lawyers for those affected who filed their case with the IPT said the investigation showed there was a “real possibility” that one of the intelligence pieces could have obtained information that could have led to actions to prevent the attack.

Pete Weatherby KC, for those affected, said in written submissions: “The perpetrators were not strangers who acted spontaneously or with a simplicity that left little room for discovery.”

At a preliminary hearing Tuesday, the tribunal in London heard arguments about the nature of the case and whether it was filed out of time.

Asked about the nature of the case, Mr Weatherby said: “There is a vindication of the claimants’ rights.

“We say that this should not or should not be overlooked.

“The plaintiffs are very interested and involved in this process.

“They were pleased that the public inquiry revealed material, information and conclusions that had not been there until now, but they see this process as the next step in (their) vindication.”

The lawyer later said that the people filing the legal claim are also seeking damages.

Neil Sheldon KC, for the security services, said the investigation into the atrocity was “inquisitorial”, adding: “The obligation on all involved was to provide the investigation with the utmost cooperation in its search for the truth.

“As part of his full cooperation with the investigation, my client has provided a self-critical internal review.”

The lawyer said the review included how the two pieces of information were handled.

“There was no shortage of candor,” Mr. Sheldon added.

The lawyer later told the tribunal that it could be important “to have some idea of ​​where this claim is going and what it is trying to achieve”.

Mr Sheldon also said it was unlikely that compensatory damages could be awarded in this case.

The tribunal heard that the cases on behalf of more than 200 people, including survivors, people on behalf of those who died and people affected by the proximity of the aftermath, will be led by three ‘main cases’.

These include the cases of Chloe Rutherford, 17, from South Shields, who died in the attack, Eve Hibbert, who suffered severe brain damage, and Lesley Callander, whose 18-year-old daughter Georgina was killed.

Lord Justice Singh and Mrs Justice Farbey will deliver written judgment at a later date.