Legal
Keepingcool in a crisis A
While most businesses implement plans detailing how to respond to an accident, handling a crisis such as a major railway incident is different and more complex says Rupert Nevin
fter a major accident or catastrophe with casualties or fatalities, it would be all too easy for panic to set in, but the first 24 hours must be
handled correctly without compromising the business. Decisions made by managers or directors
at this point lay the foundations for external scrutiny and investigations. The police and railway regulators including the Rail Accident Investigation Branch (RAIB) and Office of Rail Regulator (ORR) will immediately attend the scene; all too often representatives of the railway organisation ‘over-cooperate’, giving the authorities and media as much information as they have in the hope of sweetening the relationship. Unfortunately, this can result in self-critical, inaccurate or confidential documents being released.
Railway businesses can easily lose their way in high-pressure situations, allowing events to overtake them. By taking specialist legal advice from the outset, the fast-moving environment of a crisis can be handled more effectively, the organisation navigated through the crisis and a range of disciplines such as welfare counselling and media handling introduced to limit impact on stakeholders.
The first 24 hours The first 24 hours are the most crucial. Any
crisis will draw significant attention from external organisations, generating volumes of questions that appear to need answering immediately. The business should deploy the necessary resources to commence its own internal investigation, look beyond short-term issues and consider the long-term implications of the incident; providing a detailed strategic response covering media issues and recognising how events could be perceived in the court room. The investigation team should also
shadow the actions of the enforcement officers to ensure that it has access to similar knowledge and a fair understanding of what will happen next.
Legal obligations Almost inevitably, a range of different regulators and agencies will become involved, some conducting parallel investigations. The rights afforded to each suspect person or organisation depend on which regulator is involved; the stage of the investigation and the purpose of each action (gathering evidence or information). If a business doesn’t fully understand these rights, it should enlist specialist legal advice to allow it to respond appropriately and brief its employees about the implications of each procedure. The British Transport Police (BTP)
conducts investigations into certain railway incidents, for example involving level
crossings, cable theft and trespass. Where there is a railway accident, BTP becomes the initial contact point for other railway regulators including the RAIB and ORR, working closely with the local police force in the geographic area of the accident and investigating criminal offences. Where there is evidence of a serious
criminal offence (deaths, multiple casualties, serious injury or other serious consequences, e.g. derailment of a train or train collision), BTP decide with the CPS (Crown Prosecution Service) whether there is sufficient evidence to bring charges, for example corporate manslaughter. The BTP investigation will take precedence. RAIB may provide technical support. ORR may provide specialist safety guidance. A suspect is protected in its dealings
with the BTP by various rights provided by the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (PACE), including the right to silence. Further, any request for a witness statement is on a voluntary basis. The role of RAIB is to conduct ‘no blame’
investigations into railway accidents to identify causes and improve safety. RAIB findings are always published whether or not criminal proceedings are brought. In cases where the BTP/police do not have precedence, RAIB will lead the investigation into the cause of the accident/incident. However, even where the police have primacy, RAIB inspectors will normally interview persons (and take witness statements) before the police or ORR. RAIB has the power to compel any person to answer documents and provide documents (unlike the police). Offering information to RAIB which is or may be inaccurate is counter-productive and may be a criminal offence.
In contrast, ORR investigates and
prosecutes ‘non-serious’ breaches of health and safety legislation in the operation of railways. Normally ORR awaits the outcome of an RAIB investigation or the police (where there is a serious criminal offence) before commencing its investigation. The investigation may include requests for voluntary witness statements (where there is evidence against a suspect) and may be preceded by a request under compulsion power to a person to answer questions or produce a document. This process is normally used as part of the information gathering process and any information provided cannot be used in evidence against that person.
Page 124 April 2013
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112 |
Page 113 |
Page 114 |
Page 115 |
Page 116 |
Page 117 |
Page 118 |
Page 119 |
Page 120 |
Page 121 |
Page 122 |
Page 123 |
Page 124 |
Page 125 |
Page 126 |
Page 127 |
Page 128 |
Page 129 |
Page 130 |
Page 131 |
Page 132 |
Page 133 |
Page 134 |
Page 135 |
Page 136 |
Page 137 |
Page 138 |
Page 139 |
Page 140 |
Page 141 |
Page 142 |
Page 143 |
Page 144 |
Page 145 |
Page 146 |
Page 147 |
Page 148 |
Page 149 |
Page 150 |
Page 151 |
Page 152 |
Page 153 |
Page 154 |
Page 155 |
Page 156 |
Page 157 |
Page 158 |
Page 159 |
Page 160 |
Page 161 |
Page 162 |
Page 163 |
Page 164 |
Page 165 |
Page 166 |
Page 167 |
Page 168 |
Page 169 |
Page 170 |
Page 171 |
Page 172 |
Page 173 |
Page 174 |
Page 175 |
Page 176 |
Page 177 |
Page 178 |
Page 179 |
Page 180 |
Page 181 |
Page 182 |
Page 183 |
Page 184 |
Page 185 |
Page 186 |
Page 187 |
Page 188 |
Page 189 |
Page 190 |
Page 191 |
Page 192 |
Page 193 |
Page 194 |
Page 195 |
Page 196 |
Page 197 |
Page 198 |
Page 199 |
Page 200 |
Page 201 |
Page 202 |
Page 203 |
Page 204