On September 16, 2025, a landmark moment unfolded in the UK Parliament as the government introduced the long-awaited Hillsborough Law, officially known as the Public Office (Accountability) Bill 2025. This sweeping legislation, years in the making and born from the pain of one of Britain’s darkest tragedies, promises to transform how public authorities respond when disaster strikes—and, crucially, how they are held to account when things go terribly wrong.
The origins of the Bill trace back to April 1989, when a crush at Hillsborough football stadium in Sheffield claimed the lives of 97 Liverpool fans. The disaster, intended as a day of celebration for football supporters, instead became a national trauma. Yet the heartbreak of Hillsborough was compounded by what followed: decades of institutional defensiveness, cover-ups, and a protracted fight by bereaved families to uncover the truth. According to Evening Standard, the new law is intended as a direct response to this legacy, aiming to ensure that “truth and justice are never concealed again,” as Justice Secretary David Lammy put it.
At the heart of the Hillsborough Law is a legal duty of candour. More than 1.9 million public servants across the UK—spanning local councils, police, health authorities, and more—would be legally required to act with honesty and integrity at all times. For the first time, criminal sanctions are proposed for officials who commit “egregious” breaches or flagrantly mislead the public, with penalties that could include up to two years’ imprisonment. The Bill introduces a new offence, specifically targeting those who intentionally or recklessly mislead the public, replacing the older, less precise misconduct in public office charge.
But the Bill’s reach goes further. It also establishes a duty to assist, compelling public bodies and private entities performing public work to proactively provide information to inquiries and inquests. This means no more waiting for investigators to unearth the truth piece by piece—institutions must come forward with relevant facts at the earliest reasonable point. As Pete Weatherby KC, a leading campaigner and drafter of the 2017 Hillsborough Bill, explained in an op-ed for Garden Court North Chambers, “The law contains three pillars. Firstly, the duty of candour... Secondly, the Bill provides a duty to assist... Thirdly, the Bill includes the extension of non-means tested public funding for bereaved families at inquests where the state is itself represented.”
One of the most celebrated aspects of the Hillsborough Law is its provision for bereaved families. For the first time, families facing inquests will receive non-means-tested legal aid, leveling the playing field between ordinary citizens and state bodies armed with extensive legal resources. Julia Waters, who campaigned after her sister’s death following an Ofsted inspection, described this as a “profoundly just” step, ensuring families are never left alone in their pursuit of truth. The Bill’s supporters argue that this change will “substantially rebalance the scales of justice and allow families to hold public officials to account.”
The Bill’s introduction was hailed by campaigners as a “victory,” but it’s been a long and hard-fought battle. The original Hillsborough Bill was first laid before Parliament in 2017, supported by MPs across the political spectrum, but fell with the general election that year. In the years since, the campaign for a duty of candour has been joined by families and survivors of other national tragedies—including Grenfell Tower, the Post Office Horizon scandal, the contaminated blood disaster, and the Manchester Arena bombing. As Pete Weatherby KC noted, “The reason why so many justice campaigns have supported this law is because the legacy project of the Hillsborough families was aimed at preventing the industrial scale cover-up which happened to them from occurring again.”
Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer has positioned the legislation as a fundamental shift, not just for the families of the 97, but for all those affected by state failures. “This is a law for the 97, but it is also a law for the subpostmasters who suffered because of the Horizon scandal, the victims of infected blood, and those who died in the terrible Grenfell Tower fire. This is change only this Government can deliver,” he stated, according to Evening Standard.
The Bill also contains robust protections for whistleblowers. It aims to shield ordinary public servants from pressure by managers or senior officials to participate in cover-ups, and to protect those who step forward to expose wrongdoing. In Weatherby’s words, “It will also support and protect the vast majority of ordinary decent public servants who go to work each day to serve us the public.”
Yet, as with any ambitious reform, the Bill’s journey is not without obstacles. Campaigners and bereaved families have expressed cautious optimism, warning that the Bill must not be “watered down” as it moves through Parliament. Margaret Aspinall, whose son James died at Hillsborough, voiced hope that “no one will ever have to suffer like we did,” but she and others are watching Parliament closely to ensure the Bill is passed in its entirety and enacted in full. The Hillsborough Law Now group has urged the government to “be brave and ignore the vested interests” that might seek to dilute its provisions.
Legal experts and politicians have raised questions about the Bill’s limitations. While criminal sanctions are reserved for the most severe cases, critics worry about a grey area for less serious—but still damaging—failures to disclose or act with candour. There’s also debate over precisely who will be covered under the definition of “public servants,” with uncertainty about whether MPs, ministers, or judges will be included. Ian Byrne, a Hillsborough survivor and now a Labour MP, pointed out that earlier drafts “fell far short” of campaigners’ expectations, lacking a binding duty of candour and equal legal funding for families. He has championed a more stringent version, arguing for legislation with “moral force and legal teeth.”
The Bill contains no carve outs for the Security Services or Military, but it does rigorously safeguard national security and constitutional rights, including the privilege against self-incrimination and privacy rights. This balance has been a point of negotiation, as successive governments, ministers, and officials have at times resisted the Bill’s full force. Weatherby recounted the “war of attrition” that marked the Bill’s development, with campaign directors and families continually pushing back against attempts to weaken its core provisions.
Despite its imperfections, the current Bill is widely seen as delivering on the core demands of the original campaign. It has won the endorsement of leading families and justice campaigns, including INQUEST and JUSTICE, as well as former senior judges and public inquiry chairs. Natasha Elcock of Grenfell United welcomed the duty of candour, saying it will make it harder for public and private agencies to escape scrutiny. Lobby Akinnola, who lost his father during the Covid pandemic, described the Bill as “a huge step towards” justice for all affected by systemic failure.
As the Bill begins its legislative journey, it stands as a testament to the persistence of families who refused to accept silence or half-truths in the face of tragedy. Its ultimate impact will depend not just on what is written in statute, but on the willingness of those in power to uphold candour over convenience and justice over institutional self-preservation. The eyes of the nation—and all those who have ever sought truth from the state—will be watching.
