Councils "fail to understand" judicial independence of coroners: Chief Coroner

Not all local authorities understand the central element of judicial independence enjoyed by coroners, the Chief Coroner for England and Wales has admitted.

In a speech to the Howard League for Penal Reform, His Honour Judge Peter Thornton QC said: “Although individual coroners are part of a national structure of coroners, part of a statutory framework of coroner services across England and Wales under the Coroners Act 1988, it is a service which operates very locally. Each coroner is appointed locally, by the local authority, paid locally and their service is funded locally.”

He added that within that local structure coroners were required to operate independently, “acting as judicial officers in their coroner work, making judicial decisions, investigating deaths, deciding whether a death is from natural causes or not, presiding over inquests in their court. They are best described as independent judicial office holders, although in the case of Forrest they were described as ‘judges’.”

The Chief Coroner continued: “This interface between the independent judge side of the coroner’s work and hard-pressed local authorities who fund the service, provide accommodation, pay for the coroner and staff to support the coroner, pay the medical bills (such as post-mortem examinations and toxicology) is not without its difficulties.

“Not all local authorities fully understand this central element of judicial independence. After all, they say, we are paying the bill, it’s our public money we’re spending. Some want coroners to be brought more into the local authority fold, to be like Chief Officers. But coroners are not Chief Officers. They are not council employees. So being local is not always easy, particularly in hard financial times.”

HHJ Thornton revealed that many coroners had said to him that they felt isolated.

“Not unwanted and unloved exactly, but operating on their own under variable local conditions,” he said. “And it is that localness which has produced a lack of consistency in their work, perhaps the greatest criticism levelled against coroners, one of which coroners are aware of and I believe are prepared to put right, with a little bit of help.”

The Chief Coroner said the reforms being brought in through the Coroners and Justice Act 2009 would “move steadily towards a more integrated system, more flexible, more alive to the needs of the bereaved, more open and transparent.”

The creation of the Chief Coroner position is the only coroner part of the Act (with one exception) to be in force; the rest is set to be implemented in June 2013.

Among the changes are:

  • The replacement of a rigid jurisdictional concept of coroner territoriality with greater flexibility within the coroner system;
  • The amalgamation of some coroner areas to produce consistency of coroner area size, each area with a full-time coroner;
  • Scrutiny of appointments by the Chief Coroner;
  • A ban on coroners appointing or disciplining their spouses or partners;
  • Compulsory training for coroners and coroners officers for the first time, through the Judicial College;
  • An emphasis on the whole investigation and not just the inquest; and
  • A more co-ordinated complaints system.

The judge said the Chief Coroner’s role was to provide leadership for the coroner system, to oversee the implementation of the 2009 Act, to develop reform, to create a more coordinated and accountable system, “all with a national consistency of standards and approach”. “No pressure then,” he said.

The Chief Coroner said around 93,000 deaths a year will undergo post-mortem examinations, a figure he described as “too high” and one that he would seek to reduce. Of these, 30,000 deaths will lead to inquests, 450 with a jury.

HHJ Thornton’s speech can be read in full here