November 2024 marked 50 years since the Birmingham Pub Bombings. The people of the City of Birmingham, supported by a local loyal media, expressed their respect for the 21 victims of this act of IRA murder.
This was an important collective act of mourning and remembrance led by the relatives of the victims. A dignified silence fell across the city.
Assorted civic leaders and local dignitaries were in attendance. A member of the Royal Family delivered a message on behalf of the King. A Junior Labour Government Minister and the former Conservative Mayor of the West Midlands Combined Authority (WMCA) led the important citation of the names of the dead as bereaved relatives laid wreaths for their loved ones.
The Junior Minister, Jess Phillips, a local MP who had been a key local politician in the campaign for truth, justice and accountability into the Birmingham Pub Bombings 1974 had previously cited the names of the dead in Parliament for the first time in 40 years, 10 years before.
For the relatives of the murdered and the people of Birmingham, a city marked by symbolic emblems of this tragedy, this annual act of remembrance is an important aspect in their catharsis. But this act of remembrance does not erase the tragedy of memory, salve the pain of violent loss or lessen the anger and resentment.
And next month it will be 50 years plus 1. Everyone is one year older.
Margaret Smith, the mother of Maxine Hambleton whose short life was destroyed in the Birmingham Pub Bombings 1974, just before her adult life started, will be 92 soon. Margaret’s family will carry the burden of her loss of their sister and her grandchildren may continue to do in remembrance of their aunt whose life was violently curtailed. They will bear the absence, the anger and the continuing questions of doubt.
51 years and the questions of doubt remain and accumulate. These are the questions which the families continue to ask and to demand answers to on behalf of their loved ones who cannot speak for themselves.
These are the questions that were not answered through the process of the inquest into the deaths of the 21 that was resumed in 2019.
These are the questions that were not asked at that resumed inquest or were excluded from being asked, adding to the justice gap for the families. The justice gap for the relatives of the victims of the Birmingham Pub Bombings 1974 remains.
These are the questions that form the core of the request for a statutory public inquiry pursuant to section 1 of the Inquiries Act 2005. This request made by the families has yet to be responded to by the British government through the Home Secretary, having first been made following the conclusion of that flawed coronial process which excluded the question: Who bombed Birmingham?
That same coronial process accepted assurances regarding disclosure of material and information regarding the Birmingham Pub Bombings 1974 within the control and possession of the British government. Those assurances made by the Government legal department on behalf of other government departments (including the Home Office and Ministry of Defence) which was then and now shown to be inadequate and incomplete, and which is being added to.
These are questions about accountability, preventability and appropriate response then and now, and taking responsibility for all the surrounding circumstances of the bombings. These are the questions that if remain unanswered only serve to stoke public concern, rumour and suspicion which the process of inquest and inquiry are supposed to allay.
These are questions about memory and recall, individual and corporate. These are faculties which fade with the passage of time and which those who hold the answers to or are guardians of the archives within institutions may hope to fade and wither in an expectation of avoidance of embarrassment or cost.
The avoidance of embarrassment and cost are not criteria which exist within the discretionary power of a Minister to establish a statutory public inquiry into the Birmingham Pub Bombings under the Inquiries Act 2005.
The criteria are about public concern which may – the patrician politician may argue – equate with the public interest. Is it in the public interest to have a public inquiry into the pub bombings? Will public concern be assuaged, rumour allayed, confidence in the Rule of Law restored by the process of a statutory public inquiry?
The ask made by the relatives of the victims for a statutory public inquiry have been ‘live’ within the Home Office for three years according to the office of the WMCA.
The failure to answer that question by the Home Secretary and her officials (informed by the corporate collective institutional memory of the Home Office since the 1970s), is the point of law which could be challenged before the independent judiciary by way of a Judicial Review. Leave to bring this challenge could at least force answer to the request for an inquiry which in turn could be challenged if refused. The court could be asked to adjudicate on questions of parity and consistency in Ministerial decision-making, policy and statutory interpretation regarding the criteria for establishing a statutory public inquiry – Orgreave, yes, Chinook, no. Birmingham – ‘If we simply do not decide the issue, will the issue and the families will wither and disappear or become part of the in-tray of the next Minister?’
Evidence continues to be available and to accumulate serving to fuel both speculation and rumour. For example, in a response to a written question from Laurence Turner MP answered on 22 July 2025, the Labour government confirmed that the Home Office hold historic records relating to the Birmingham Pub Bombings 1974 that have not yet been deposited in the National Archives due to ‘National Security’ (51 years of secrets, secrecy, suspicion and security?).
Lawyers for the Justice for the 21, the campaign group representing relatives of the victims, have referred to the existence of Special Branch documents containing an interview with a member of the IRA who was arrested after the pub bombings (and six months after the conviction of the Birmingham Six) in which he provided names and detailed information which was never shared, revealed or acted upon.
These are just two examples in the public domain (one via Hansard, the other via Private Eye No. 1656)
The Home Office continues to request more time in which to deliver a decision on the ‘ask’ for a statutory public inquiry into the Birmingham Pub Bombings. This continued delay should provoke an inevitable Judicial Review of either the failure to deliver a decision, or a decision which refuses the ‘ask’ and can be challenged on the reasons stated for the refusal.
The Prime Minister made his views clear when he was last in the City of Birmingham: that any continuing investigation into the Birmingham Pub Bombings would be by way of the Legacy of the Conflict arrangements being imposed upon relatives of the victims of the Conflict in Northern Ireland and now being co-sponsored and supported by the Irish government. It is assumed that the current Labour Mayor of the WMCA concurs with Downing Street, whereas his Conservative Mayoral predecessor was an active supporter of a statutory public inquiry.
The relatives of the dead have always shown solidarity with families in Northern Ireland and their opposition to being forced into the Legacy of the Conflict and the political compromises that involves. They would point to the extant inquiries into the murder of Belfast lawyer Patrick Finucane in 1989 and the Omagh Bombing 1998, both recently granted via the criteria of the 2005 Act.
The relatives of the families of those murdered by the IRA in two pubs in Birmingham on 21 November 1974 know that a statutory public inquiry is not a panacea.
The success of an inquiry – as in that into the murder of Baha Mousa and as that into the Post Office Horizon IT system – depends on a number of important factors. These include the strength of its Chair, the Terms of Reference, the processes of investigation including the effective participation of the Next-of-Kin when a complex multi-death is being looked at, its power to compel with authority evidence and witnesses, its ability to maintain public confidence into its systems of investigation, and its ability to deliver Conclusion and Recommendations on time and to budget.
A statutory public inquiry cannot attribute civil or criminal liability – but it can make referrals to the relevant criminal justice and regulatory authorities and agencies to recommend actions including prosecution.
The ask still stands and should be contested if refused by the Home Office. A political opportunity was lost on 21 November 2024 and no doubt will be lost again on 21 November 2025.
The resolve of the families of the 21 will not slip despite the attritional struggle they have been forced into and where the only fact that links them is a shared violent loss of loved ones, which remains an account unbalanced.
50 years plus one since the Birmingham Pub Bombings
50 years plus one since the Birmingham Pub Bombings
November 2024 marked 50 years since the Birmingham Pub Bombings. The people of the City of Birmingham, supported by a local loyal media, expressed their respect for the 21 victims of this act of IRA murder.
This was an important collective act of mourning and remembrance led by the relatives of the victims. A dignified silence fell across the city.
Assorted civic leaders and local dignitaries were in attendance. A member of the Royal Family delivered a message on behalf of the King. A Junior Labour Government Minister and the former Conservative Mayor of the West Midlands Combined Authority (WMCA) led the important citation of the names of the dead as bereaved relatives laid wreaths for their loved ones.
The Junior Minister, Jess Phillips, a local MP who had been a key local politician in the campaign for truth, justice and accountability into the Birmingham Pub Bombings 1974 had previously cited the names of the dead in Parliament for the first time in 40 years, 10 years before.
For the relatives of the murdered and the people of Birmingham, a city marked by symbolic emblems of this tragedy, this annual act of remembrance is an important aspect in their catharsis. But this act of remembrance does not erase the tragedy of memory, salve the pain of violent loss or lessen the anger and resentment.
And next month it will be 50 years plus 1. Everyone is one year older.
Margaret Smith, the mother of Maxine Hambleton whose short life was destroyed in the Birmingham Pub Bombings 1974, just before her adult life started, will be 92 soon. Margaret’s family will carry the burden of her loss of their sister and her grandchildren may continue to do in remembrance of their aunt whose life was violently curtailed. They will bear the absence, the anger and the continuing questions of doubt.
51 years and the questions of doubt remain and accumulate. These are the questions which the families continue to ask and to demand answers to on behalf of their loved ones who cannot speak for themselves.
These are the questions that were not answered through the process of the inquest into the deaths of the 21 that was resumed in 2019.
These are the questions that were not asked at that resumed inquest or were excluded from being asked, adding to the justice gap for the families. The justice gap for the relatives of the victims of the Birmingham Pub Bombings 1974 remains.
These are the questions that form the core of the request for a statutory public inquiry pursuant to section 1 of the Inquiries Act 2005. This request made by the families has yet to be responded to by the British government through the Home Secretary, having first been made following the conclusion of that flawed coronial process which excluded the question: Who bombed Birmingham?
That same coronial process accepted assurances regarding disclosure of material and information regarding the Birmingham Pub Bombings 1974 within the control and possession of the British government. Those assurances made by the Government legal department on behalf of other government departments (including the Home Office and Ministry of Defence) which was then and now shown to be inadequate and incomplete, and which is being added to.
These are questions about accountability, preventability and appropriate response then and now, and taking responsibility for all the surrounding circumstances of the bombings. These are the questions that if remain unanswered only serve to stoke public concern, rumour and suspicion which the process of inquest and inquiry are supposed to allay.
These are questions about memory and recall, individual and corporate. These are faculties which fade with the passage of time and which those who hold the answers to or are guardians of the archives within institutions may hope to fade and wither in an expectation of avoidance of embarrassment or cost.
The avoidance of embarrassment and cost are not criteria which exist within the discretionary power of a Minister to establish a statutory public inquiry into the Birmingham Pub Bombings under the Inquiries Act 2005.
The criteria are about public concern which may – the patrician politician may argue – equate with the public interest. Is it in the public interest to have a public inquiry into the pub bombings? Will public concern be assuaged, rumour allayed, confidence in the Rule of Law restored by the process of a statutory public inquiry?
The ask made by the relatives of the victims for a statutory public inquiry have been ‘live’ within the Home Office for three years according to the office of the WMCA.
The failure to answer that question by the Home Secretary and her officials (informed by the corporate collective institutional memory of the Home Office since the 1970s), is the point of law which could be challenged before the independent judiciary by way of a Judicial Review. Leave to bring this challenge could at least force answer to the request for an inquiry which in turn could be challenged if refused. The court could be asked to adjudicate on questions of parity and consistency in Ministerial decision-making, policy and statutory interpretation regarding the criteria for establishing a statutory public inquiry – Orgreave, yes, Chinook, no. Birmingham – ‘If we simply do not decide the issue, will the issue and the families will wither and disappear or become part of the in-tray of the next Minister?’
Evidence continues to be available and to accumulate serving to fuel both speculation and rumour. For example, in a response to a written question from Laurence Turner MP answered on 22 July 2025, the Labour government confirmed that the Home Office hold historic records relating to the Birmingham Pub Bombings 1974 that have not yet been deposited in the National Archives due to ‘National Security’ (51 years of secrets, secrecy, suspicion and security?).
Lawyers for the Justice for the 21, the campaign group representing relatives of the victims, have referred to the existence of Special Branch documents containing an interview with a member of the IRA who was arrested after the pub bombings (and six months after the conviction of the Birmingham Six) in which he provided names and detailed information which was never shared, revealed or acted upon.
These are just two examples in the public domain (one via Hansard, the other via Private Eye No. 1656)
The Home Office continues to request more time in which to deliver a decision on the ‘ask’ for a statutory public inquiry into the Birmingham Pub Bombings. This continued delay should provoke an inevitable Judicial Review of either the failure to deliver a decision, or a decision which refuses the ‘ask’ and can be challenged on the reasons stated for the refusal.
The Prime Minister made his views clear when he was last in the City of Birmingham: that any continuing investigation into the Birmingham Pub Bombings would be by way of the Legacy of the Conflict arrangements being imposed upon relatives of the victims of the Conflict in Northern Ireland and now being co-sponsored and supported by the Irish government. It is assumed that the current Labour Mayor of the WMCA concurs with Downing Street, whereas his Conservative Mayoral predecessor was an active supporter of a statutory public inquiry.
The relatives of the dead have always shown solidarity with families in Northern Ireland and their opposition to being forced into the Legacy of the Conflict and the political compromises that involves. They would point to the extant inquiries into the murder of Belfast lawyer Patrick Finucane in 1989 and the Omagh Bombing 1998, both recently granted via the criteria of the 2005 Act.
The relatives of the families of those murdered by the IRA in two pubs in Birmingham on 21 November 1974 know that a statutory public inquiry is not a panacea.
The success of an inquiry – as in that into the murder of Baha Mousa and as that into the Post Office Horizon IT system – depends on a number of important factors. These include the strength of its Chair, the Terms of Reference, the processes of investigation including the effective participation of the Next-of-Kin when a complex multi-death is being looked at, its power to compel with authority evidence and witnesses, its ability to maintain public confidence into its systems of investigation, and its ability to deliver Conclusion and Recommendations on time and to budget.
A statutory public inquiry cannot attribute civil or criminal liability – but it can make referrals to the relevant criminal justice and regulatory authorities and agencies to recommend actions including prosecution.
The ask still stands and should be contested if refused by the Home Office. A political opportunity was lost on 21 November 2024 and no doubt will be lost again on 21 November 2025.
The resolve of the families of the 21 will not slip despite the attritional struggle they have been forced into and where the only fact that links them is a shared violent loss of loved ones, which remains an account unbalanced.
Related Posts
The Metropolitan Police found it was systemically racist, leaders buried the report
First pre-Horizon Post Office theft case referred to Court of Appeal
Victims losing faith in the justice system according to landmark survey