Ministers Pull Hillsborough Law Amendment Amid Family Backlash

The UK government has withdrawn a controversial amendment to the Hillsborough Law** just hours before it was due for debate in the House of Commons, following intense opposition from victims' families and campaigners.[1]

The Hillsborough Law, formally known as the Hillsborough Law (Duty of Candour and Disclosure) Bill, aims to impose a legal duty on public officials to tell the truth and disclose information promptly in public inquiries and inquests. Championed by Labour MP Diane Johnson, whose sister died in the 1989 Hillsborough disaster, the bill seeks to prevent cover-ups like those exposed after the tragedy that claimed 97 Liverpool fans' lives.

Ministers had proposed an amendment that campaigners argued would significantly weaken the legislation. Critics, including families of the victims, claimed it introduced loopholes allowing officials to withhold information under broad "national security" or "public interest" exemptions, effectively undermining the bill's core purpose.[1]

Backlash intensified over the weekend, with families issuing stark warnings. "This amendment betrays the promise of justice," one bereaved relative told reporters, echoing calls from Hillsborough survivors and supporters to scrap it entirely.[2] Pressure mounted through social media, statements from MPs, and direct appeals to ministers, highlighting fears that the changes would protect institutions rather than victims.

In a sudden U-turn, the government confirmed late Sunday that the amendment would not proceed to the vote scheduled for Monday. Sources indicate ministers bowed to the outcry, prioritizing the bill's passage without dilutions. "We've listened to the families," a spokesperson said, though questions linger over future attempts to alter the law.

The withdrawal represents a victory for campaigners who have fought for over three decades for accountability. The Hillsborough Law now advances unamended, potentially becoming law soon, ensuring greater transparency in future disasters. Families hailed it as "a step towards truth," but vowed vigilance against any resurgence of weakening measures.[1][2]

(Word count: 298)