At least 13 may have killed themselves over UK's Post Office wrongful convictions scandal
Another 59 people contemplated suicide over the scandal–one of the biggest miscarriages of justice in UK history. From around 1999 to 2015, hundreds of people who worked at Post Office branches were wrongly convicted of theft, fraud, and false accounting based on evidence from a defective information technology system. Some went to prison or were forced into bankruptcy. Others lost their homes, suffered health problems or breakdowns in their relationships, or became ostracized by their communities.
Retired judge Wyn Williams, who chairs a public inquiry into the scandal, said in a report published Tuesday that 13 people killed themselves as a consequence of a faulty Post Office accounting system showing an illusory shortfall in branch accounts, according to their families. The problems at the Post Office, which is state-owned but operates as a private business, were known for years. But the full scale of the injustice didn't become widely known until last year when a TV docudrama propelled the scandal to national headlines and galvanized support for victims.
The culprit was a piece of software called Horizon, made by the Japanese firm Fujitsu, which the Post Office introduced 25 years ago across branches to automate sales accounting. When the software showed false account shortfalls, the Post Office accused branch managers of dishonesty and obliged them to repay the money. In all, the report said that about 1,000 people were prosecuted and convicted based on evidence from the incorrect data. The government has since introduced legislation to reverse the convictions and compensate the victims.
Williams said that some senior Post Office employees knew–or should have known–that the Horizon system was faulty. But the Post Office maintained the fiction that its data was always accurate, he said.
Jo Hamilton, a former Post Office manager and a lead campaigner, said that the report 'shows the full scale of the horror that they unleashed on us.'
In a statement, the Post Office's chairman pledged to ensure that all victims are compensated. 'The Post Office did not listen to postmasters and as an organization we let them down. Postmasters and their families have suffered years of pain,' Nigel Railton said. 'It has taken them too long to clear their names and in many cases to receive redress.'
Tuesday's report was the first to be published from the inquiry, which was launched by the government and has the power to require evidence from all parties. It's expected to issue a further report at a later date that will address who was at fault for overseeing the scandal and potentially attribute blame.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Al Arabiya
an hour ago
- Al Arabiya
French intel chief: No certainty on whereabouts of Iran's uranium stocks
The head of France's foreign intelligence service said on Tuesday that some of Iran's highly enriched uranium stocks were destroyed by American and Israeli strikes, but there was no certainty on where the rest was now located. Speaking in an interview on LCI television, Nicolas Lerner, who heads the DGSE, said all aspects of Iran's nuclear program had been put back by several months following the air strikes, but while Paris had indications where Iran's highly enriched uranium stocks were there would be no certainty until the United Nations atomic watchdog returned to the country.
Al Arabiya
2 hours ago
- Al Arabiya
PHOTO ESSAY: 30 Years On, Srebrenica Massacre Survivors Live in the Shadow of Death
Three decades after their fathers, brothers, husbands, and sons were killed in the bloodiest episode of the Bosnian war, women who survived the Srebrenica massacre find some solace in having been able to unearth their loved ones from far-away mass graves and bury them individually at the town's memorial cemetery. The women say that living near the graves reminds them not only of the tragedy but of their love and perseverance in seeking justice for the men they lost. 'I found peace here in the proximity of my loved ones,' said Fadila Efendic, 74, who returned to her family home in 2002, seven years after being driven away from Srebrenica and witnessing her husband and son being taken away to be killed. The Srebrenica killings were the crescendo of Bosnia's 1992–95 war, which came after the breakup of Yugoslavia unleashed nationalist passions and territorial ambitions that set Bosnian Serbs against the country's two other main ethnic populations – Croats and Bosniaks. On July 11, 1995, Serbs overran Srebrenica, at the time a UN-protected safe area. They separated at least 8,000 Bosniak men and boys from their wives, mothers, and sisters and slaughtered them. Those who tried to escape were chased through the woods and over the mountains around town. Bosniak women and children were packed onto buses and expelled. The executioners tried to erase the evidence of their crime, plowing the bodies into hastily dug mass graves and scattering them among other burial sites. As soon as the war was over, Efendic and other women like her vowed to find their loved ones, bring them back, and give them a proper burial. 'At home, often especially at dusk, I imagine that they are still around, that they went out to go to work and that they will come back,' Efendic said, adding: 'That idea that they will return, that I am near them is what keeps me going.' To date, almost ninety percent of those reported missing since the Srebrenica massacre have been accounted for through their remains exhumed from hundreds of mass graves scattered around the eastern town. Body parts are still being found in death pits around Srebrenica and identified through painstaking DNA analysis. So far, the remains of more than 6,700 people – including Efendic's husband and son – have been found in several different mass graves and reburied at the memorial cemetery inaugurated in Srebrenica in 2003 at the relentless insistence of the women. 'We wrote history in white marble headstones and that is our success,' said Kada Hotic, who lost her husband, son, and fifty-six other male relatives in the massacre. 'Despite the fact that our hearts shiver when we speak about our sons, our husbands, our brothers, our people, our town, we refused to let (what happened to) them be forgotten.' The Srebrenica carnage has been declared a genocide by two UN courts. Dozens of Srebrenica women testified before the UN war crimes tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, helping put behind bars close to fifty Bosnian Serb wartime officials collectively sentenced to over seven hundred years in prison. After decades of fighting to keep the truth about Srebrenica alive, the women now spend their days looking at scarce mementos of their former lives, imagining the world that could have been. Sehida Abdurahmanovic, who lost dozens of male relatives in the massacre, including her husband and her brother, often stares at a few family photos, two handwritten notes from her spouse, and some personal documents she managed to take with her in 1995. 'I put these on the table to refresh my memories, to bring back to life what I used to have,' she said. 'Since 1995, we have been struggling with what we survived and we can never, not even for a single day, be truly relaxed.' Suhra Malic, 90, who lost two sons and thirty other male relatives, is also haunted by the memories. 'It is not a small feat to give birth to children, to raise them, see them get married and build them a house of their own, and then just as they move out and start a life of independence you lose them, they are gone and there is nothing you can do about it,' Malic said. Summers in Srebrenica are difficult, especially as July 11, the anniversary of the day the killing began in 1995, approaches. In her own words, Mejra Djogaz used to be 'a happy mother to three sons and now I look around myself and I am all alone. I have no one. Not a single night or day goes by that I do not wake up at two or three after midnight and start thinking about how they died,' she said. Aisa Omerovic agrees. Her husband, two sons, and forty-two other male relatives were killed in the massacre. Alone at home, she said she often hears the footsteps of her children and imagines them walking into the room. 'I wait for the door to open. I know that it won't open, but still I wait.'
Arab News
2 hours ago
- Arab News
NATO members' collective defense vow holds — for now
The pendulum of relations between NATO and Washington has swung from side to side a few times since Donald Trump won the US presidential election for the first time in 2016. It reached an all-time low in his first term, leading his successor Joe Biden, in one of his first acts after taking office, to reassure NATO members of America's commitment to the organization and its Article 5, which is the cornerstone of the alliance and states that an armed attack against one member is considered an attack against all members. Now, in the aftermath of Trump's return to the White House, he and the NATO leadership seem to have found a modus vivendi, albeit very much on Trump's terms, whereby all members substantially increase their defense spending. As has become customary before a summit or international visit by the US president, there is a sense of trepidation. This is most keenly felt by the NATO members that, and not without good reason, are uncertain about the US under Trump's presidency and its commitment to this alliance, the security of Europe and the most acute and urgent issue of supporting Ukraine. NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte embodied this anxiety in sending very flattering text messages to Trump on the eve of last month's summit in The Hague, stating that 'Europe is going to pay in a BIG way, as they should, and it will be your win.' He added that Trump had achieved what 'no American president in decades could get done.' This correspondence, which was supposed to be private, seemingly pleased Trump enough for him to post it on his social media platform. These attempts to keep the Trump administration on board are coming at a heavy financial cost, but they have nevertheless been necessary and long overdue. Whether they have been a response to Trump's relentless pressure on member states to increase their defense budgets or to the realization that the post-Cold War bonanza of 'butter instead of cannons' is over, it is clear that maintaining Western-style democracies and their values must be backed by investing, and massively so, in the rebuilding of the West's military muscle. The trajectory of substantial increases in defense budgets began as a result of Russia's aggression against its Ukrainian neighbor, which illustrated that Europe faces a threat very close to home. The current commitment by the allies to hike their defense budgets to 5 percent of gross domestic product, to be reached within a decade, is a huge leap that only a year ago would have been unthinkable. The alliance is at its best when it is united, coherent in its objectives and prepared to use military force Yossi Mekelberg Admittedly, out of this 5 percent, 'only' 3.5 percent of GDP will be allocated directly to defense, 'based on the agreed definition of NATO defense expenditure by 2035 to resource core defense requirements, and to meet the NATO Capability Targets.' But beyond this very bureaucratic language lies a sea change which means that Europe and Canada can no longer rely on the US alone for their security and must play a much more proactive part, backed by adequate resources. The war in Ukraine no doubt helped to focus the minds of NATO members on the fact that they face real threats and that the deterministic approach that assumes that liberal democracies are not only immune from threat, but also too attractive a proposition not to be emulated by other countries, are long gone. Moreover, the lingering ideological and socioeconomic crisis in the US also means that it has no intention of indefinitely shouldering the main burden of securing the West. It can be argued, and not without justification, that setting a target to be achieved in a decade, while the security threats are very much present right now, could hardly be the answer, especially considering that the additional 1.5 percent is not on core defense spending on troops and weapons but allocated to 'defense-related expenditure.' Nevertheless, this is a significant change in the attitude to security and how to achieve it in Europe and Canada. And at least for the remaining years of the current American administration, the other members of the alliance know that Washington will be watching like a hawk to ensure that they stand by their commitments. But it is also an important signal, first and foremost to Russia, as well as to China and any nonstate actors that pose a threat to security and international stability, that Europe is building up its military force, mainly as a deterrent, but it will not be afraid to use it if necessary. One of the most important takeaways from The Hague summit was that, by the end of it all, countries affirmed their commitment to collective defense as enshrined in Article 5 of the Washington Treaty. In other words, at least for now, America's commitment to the glue that keeps NATO together and relevant, of mutual responsibility for the 32 members to protect each other and the freedom and democracy of their 1 billion citizens, holds. However, the biggest and most immediate challenge for NATO is to prevent Russia gaining the upper hand in Ukraine and, currently, the mixed messages from Washington are not helping this cause. Ukraine is under immense military pressure from Russia, whether on the front line or in the intensity of drone attacks on centers of population, which also affect morale and add to the war fatigue. While Trump said toward the end of last week that he came away disappointed from a telephone call with Russian President Vladimir Putin because it does not appear that the Russian leader is looking to stop the war against Ukraine, his administration also held back some weapons shipments to Ukraine at a crucial time, apparently due to a review of military spending. Not an encouraging response. NATO's importance as a collective security mechanism for defending its members' liberal-democratic way of life has not diminished over the years, although it has seen changes in terms of the challenges it faces and the methods of addressing them, whether this is traditional warfare, hybrid warfare, fighting nonstate actors or increasing cybersecurity defenses. The alliance is at its best when it is united, coherent in its objectives and prepared to use military force either to protect itself or those that are prey to aggressors such as Russia in Ukraine. NATO is facing major tests and it cannot afford transatlantic divisions or being under-resourced, a situation that at least for now seems to have been considerably improved. • Yossi Mekelberg is a professor of international relations and an associate fellow of the MENA Program at Chatham House. X: @YMekelberg
