This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/feb/28/tunisia-sousse-beach-attack-victims-were-unlawfully-killed-coroner-rules

The article has changed 9 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 6 Version 7
Families of Tunisia beach attack victims to sue travel company Families of Tunisia beach attack victims to sue travel company
(about 5 hours later)
The families of some of the British victims of a terror attack at a beach in Tunisia are to sue Thomson holidays’ owner, Tui, after a coroner ruled all 30 were unlawfully killed. The families of the British victims of a terror attack at a beach in Tunisia have been left “unable to rest or move on”, they said on Tuesday, as they vowed to sue the tour operator they hold responsible for their loss.
Judge Nicholas Loraine-Smith delivered his verdict on Tuesday at the end of a seven-week inquest into the deaths of 30 Britons in a mass shooting at the Tunisian holiday resort of Sousse in 2015. Speaking at the end of the seven-week inquest into the 2015 mass shooting at the Imperial Marhaba hotel in Sousse, the relatives of 22 of the victims accused Thomson Holidays’ owner Tui of putting “safety before a sale” after the coroner ruled that their relatives were unlawfully killed – but said he could not rule that neglect by the tour operator played a part.
After relatives listened tearfully to Loraine-Smith’s summing up, in which he rejected an argument by the families that neglect by the tour operator played a part in the tragedy, a solicitor for 22 of the victims’ families said her clients would launch civil proceedings against Tui, with whom all 30 had booked their trip. The attack led to the greatest loss of British life in a single incident since the 7/7 bombings in London. Tui, with which all 30 Britons who were killed booked their holidays, came under significant scrutiny during the inquest over its handling of Foreign Office travel advice for Tunisia as well as security deficiencies at the hotel. Judge Nicholas Loraine-Smith also described the response of police called to the scene as “at best shambolic, at worst cowardly”.
With a group of relatives standing behind her, Kylie Hutchison, a solicitor at Irwin Mitchell, said: “It is now crucial that the whole travel industry learns from what happened in Sousse to reduce the risk of similar catastrophic incidents in the future. But he added that it was impossible to say what difference better security would have made. And as family members listened in a packed courtroom, he said the laws around neglect did not cover tourists choosing to go on holiday because travel companies and the authorities did not have a formal duty of care.
“On behalf of our clients who lost members of their family and those who suffered injuries in this terrible incident, we will now be preparing to commence civil proceedings against Tui.” The widow and son of John Stollery, a soldier-turned-social worker killed in the attack, said afterwards they regretted that the legal framework did not allow the coroner to draw the “right conclusion”. Cheryl and Matt Stollery added that the case was “unique ... Therefore the findings and outcomes should reflect this uniqueness.”
Speaking outside the court, Tui’s UK managing director, Nick Longman, said the company was “so very sorry” for the “pain and loss those affected have suffered”. He added: “As an industry we have adapted and we will need to continue to do so.” They said: “Disappointingly, we still believe questions have been left unanswered and responsibilities have not been accepted, so we are not able to rest or move on.”
Hundreds of tourists were sunbathing outside the Imperial Marhaba hotel when jihadi Seifeddine Rezgui opened fire with a Kalashnikov assault rifle, killing 38 people, 30 of them British, in an attack that lasted about 30 minutes. Rezgui was shot dead by Tunisian authorities as he ran from the hotel. Suzanne Richards, who lost her eldest son, Joel, her father, Charles Evans, and her brother Adrian Evans in the attack, said: “The travel industry process of booking and giving travel advice needs to be reviewed, by implementing robust travel advice and security audits before and during all holidays to safeguard the customer and the industry – safety before a sale.”
Tui came under significant scrutiny over its handling of Foreign Office travel advice for Tunisia as well as the security at the hotel. During his summing up, the coroner: She added: “My family placed their trust in the fact that Tui, with all their knowledge and expertise, would not allow my family to travel to a hotel or destination where their safety was not the first priority – and yet ... they received no advice or warning.”
Found that Tui did not inform customers where to find the advice after a prior attack on the Bardo National Museum in the Tunisian capital, Tunis, that killed 22 people. Summing up the inquest on Tuesday morning, the coroner:
Found that Tui did not inform customers about where to find advice after a prior attack on the Bardo National Museum in the Tunisian capital, Tunis, that killed 22 people.
Said that customers believed they had been reassured by Tui after the Bardo attack that it was safe to travel to Tunisia, although this was disputed by Tui.Said that customers believed they had been reassured by Tui after the Bardo attack that it was safe to travel to Tunisia, although this was disputed by Tui.
Described the Tunisian police response, which he said was deliberately delayed, as “at best shambolic, at worst cowardly”. Concluded that delays in security authorities attending the scene were “deliberate and unjustifiable”.
Praised the families of the victims for “a quiet dignity of which your loved ones would be proud”.Praised the families of the victims for “a quiet dignity of which your loved ones would be proud”.
Lawyers representing the families had urged the coroner to rule that neglect played a part in their relatives’ deaths alongside a conventional finding of unlawful killing. After the inquest concluded, with a group of relatives standing behind her on the steps of the Royal Courts of Justice, Kylie Hutchison, a solicitor at Irwin Mitchell, confirmed legal action would be taken against Tui, which in the year to September made an underlying profit of €1bn (£866m).
But Loraine-Smith told the inquest that legal precedents prevented inquests from applying that conclusion to tourists on holiday because they were not “dependent” on the travel company or hotel. Referring to existing precedents, he said: “They very substantially limit the circumstances in which neglect can feature in the conclusions.” “It is now crucial that the whole travel industry learns from what happened in Sousse to reduce the risk of similar catastrophic incidents in the future,” she said.
He said he agreed with Tui lawyer Howard Stevens QC that it would be a “quantum leap” in the law to consider the holidaymakers as being “dependent”. Speaking outside the court, Tui’s UK managing director, Nick Longman, said the company was “so very sorry” for the “pain and loss those affected have suffered”. He added: “As an industry we have adapted and we will need to continue to do so.”
Loraine-Smith added that there were a lot of “what ifs” around the case, and better hotel security may simply have meant that more people died on the beach instead. Hundreds of tourists were sunbathing outside the Imperial Marhaba on 26 June 2015 when jihadi Seifeddine Rezgui opened fire with a Kalashnikov assault rifle, killing 38 people, 30 of them British, in an attack that lasted about 30 minutes. Rezgui was shot dead by Tunisian authorities as he ran from the hotel.
As the packed courtroom watched in silence, he said the only factor that may have made a material difference was if the hotel had armed guards. But the coroner added: “Having reviewed the legal advice on gun law in Tunisia it’s clear this was not a realistic option. The attack came three months after Islamist militants attacked the Bardo in Tunis. They killed 21 people – mostly European tourists – on the spot, and another victim died 10 days later.
“The simple but tragic truth in this case is that a gunman armed with a gun and grenades went to that hotel intending to kill as many tourists as he could.” Lawyers representing the families of the British Sousse victims had urged the coroner to rule that neglect played a part in their relatives’ deaths, in part because of a failure to provide adequate warnings. One holidaymaker said his wife had discussed the Bardo attack with a travel agent, who said it was a “one-off” and that Sousse was “100% safe”.
The judge said although in general the response of the hotel staff was “disorganised and chaotic”, some of them displayed “conspicuous personal courage” in their efforts to protect the guests. He said that guests had displayed the same courage. But Loraine-Smith told the inquest that legal precedents prevented inquests from applying that conclusion to tourists on holiday because they were not “dependent” on the travel company or hotel. Referring to existing precedents, he said: “They very substantially limit the circumstances in which neglect can feature in the conclusions.”Loraine-Smith added that there were a lot of “what-ifs” around the case, and better hotel security may simply have meant that more people died on the beach instead.
He added: “The simple but tragic truth in this case is that a gunman armed with a gun and grenades went to that hotel intending to kill as many tourists as he could.”
But he painted a different picture of the response of police and military, including the guard who took off his shirt to hide the fact he was an officer. He said with the exception of two marine guards, no police entered the hotel grounds until the gunman had killed all 38 tourists.But he painted a different picture of the response of police and military, including the guard who took off his shirt to hide the fact he was an officer. He said with the exception of two marine guards, no police entered the hotel grounds until the gunman had killed all 38 tourists.
The judge also referred to a unit that stopped off to pick up more weapons instead of going straight to the scene. “They had everything they required to confront the gunman and could have been at the scene within minutes,” he said, adding: “The delay was deliberate and unjustifiable.”The judge also referred to a unit that stopped off to pick up more weapons instead of going straight to the scene. “They had everything they required to confront the gunman and could have been at the scene within minutes,” he said, adding: “The delay was deliberate and unjustifiable.”
In a statement issued at the close of the inquest, Andrew Ritchie QC, who represented the families, acknowledged that the law restricted the coroner’s ability to ascribe blame and said the families had found that structure “both helpful and frustrating”.In a statement issued at the close of the inquest, Andrew Ritchie QC, who represented the families, acknowledged that the law restricted the coroner’s ability to ascribe blame and said the families had found that structure “both helpful and frustrating”.
The inquest, held at the Royal Courts of Justice in London, heard emotional and graphic evidence from survivors and relatives of victims. Longman said this company and the travel industry in general “must now take some time to further reflect”.
The attack came three months after Islamist militants attacked the Bardo in Tunis. They killed 21 people – mostly European tourists – on the spot, and another victim died 10 days later.
During his summing up, the coroner found that Tui did not inform customers concerned about that attack where to find the official Foreign Office (FCO) travel advice. He referred to a scripted response to general questions and answers Tui prepared for its staff after the Bardo deaths in March 2015.
The coroner said: “It does not give any details of the attack but only refers to ‘the incident that took place there yesterday’. It doesn’t mention the phrase terrorism. It refers to the FCO advice but it gives no guidance as to where it’s going to be found.”
He added: “A number of customers did believe they had been reassured to their safety and further customers would not have gone to Tunisia if they had seen the FCO travel advice.”
In a statement released after the conclusion of the inquest, Longman, who took up post as managing director of Tui UK just weeks before the attack, said: “On behalf of everyone at TUI UK, I would like to again extend our deepest sympathy. We are so very sorry for the pain and loss those affected have suffered.”
He added: “We have now heard the coroner’s findings and his comments regarding the provision of security and visibility of travel advice. These are complex matters and we have already taken steps to raise awareness of the FCO’s Travel Aware campaign. Together with the travel industry in light of these comments we must now take some time to further reflect on these areas.”
The coroner said earlier he would take submissions over the next couple of months from the families, Tui and the FCO on recommendations for a preventing future deaths report.
The coroner has powers to produce a report for the government with suggestions for changes in law to prevent future deaths from occurring. Loraine-Smith said he had not decided whether a report was appropriate but would take submissions.