Families of the 29 people killed in the 1994 Chinook helicopter crash on the Mull of Kintyre have launched a High Court judicial review aiming to compel the UK Government to order a public inquiry and to unseal files they say have been withheld for decades.
Lawyers for relatives submitted an application challenging the government’s refusal to start a judge-led inquiry and its decision to seal documents relating to the crash for 100 years. The families say the decision denies them answers to unresolved questions about the aircraft’s airworthiness and the circumstances that led to the fatal flight on June 2, 1994.
The crash of Boeing Chinook ZD576 in foggy conditions killed all 29 people on board, including officers from MI5, the British Army and the Royal Ulster Constabulary. Relatives and their legal team say newly obtained evidence indicates the Mark 2 Chinook involved was not airworthy and should not have flown that day.
Former squadron leader Robert Burke, speaking last month, said the aircraft was ordered into the air as a "show flight" intended to demonstrate the safety of its Mark 2 upgrade. Families say that assertion and other concerns about the aircraft’s maintenance and certification were not properly investigated at the time and have been excluded from subsequent inquiries.
The judicial review seeks to overturn the government's stance and is being pursued under the right-to-life provisions of the Human Rights Act. The claim alleges that "concerns as to airworthiness, the process by which the aircraft involved in the crash was authorised to fly, and the potential role in the crash of a lack of airworthiness, have never been fully, effectively and independently investigated and brought to light."
Lawyer Mark Stephens, representing the families, told media the legal action was necessary after what he described as a pattern of official failings. "The families have been forced to resort to the courts," he said. "Their claim highlights a catalogue of flaws, errors, missed opportunities, wrong assumptions, warnings and a raft of safety issues which have been covered up and sealed away in the hope the truth won't come out and that relatives will die before documents are made public."
A Ministry of Defence spokesman said the department believed a public inquiry was unlikely to identify new evidence. Downing Street and the MoD have both previously rejected calls for a judge-led inquiry into the crash.
The relatives’ legal action follows separate developments in Parliament and elsewhere. An early day motion calling for a public inquiry has been tabled by Northern Ireland MP Sorcha Eastwood. Former defence secretary Sir Liam Fox has also been reported to have launched his own investigation and said he had "deep concerns" about aspects of the crash and subsequent handling of evidence.
Families have long criticised the handling of official records and investigations into the accident, saying that key facts were withheld from earlier probes and that some documents were sealed. The judicial review asks the High Court to rule that the government should either order a public inquiry or provide a lawful explanation for retaining the material under a century-long closure.
The High Court application does not set out a timetable for hearings. If the court grants permission for a full judicial review, ministers would be required to answer the families’ legal arguments in open proceedings. The legal move marks the latest effort by relatives to secure a fresh, independent examination of one of the most contentious military aviation disasters in recent British history.