The Widgery Tribunal was a judicial inquiry established by the British government in early 1972 to investigate a large number of deaths and shootings caused by the actions of the British Army in the Bogside, Derry, on 30 January 1972 during what became known as Bloody Sunday. On 31 January 1972 the lord chief justice of England, Lord Widgery, was appointed by British prime minister Edward Heath to conduct this inquiry. Sitting by himself, Widgery worked quickly: he heard evidence, first in Coleraine, Northern Ireland, in February and March of that year, with further hearings held in London in March. One hundred and fourteen people were called to give evidence.
His report was completed in early April and presented to Parliament on 19 April 1972. It noted that the organisers of the illegal civil rights march on 30 January 1972 had "created a highly dangerous situation in which a clash between demonstrators and the security forces was almost inevitable". While finding that on one occasion shooting by 1 Para was unjustified and "bordered on the reckless", he largely exonerated the soldiers of that regiment who shot dead 13 men and injured many more on the day. He also voiced "strong suspicion" that some of those killed had fired weapons or been in possession of bombs. The Saville Inquiry later concluded that Lord Widgery had faced much "inaccurate and misleading" evidence given by senior army officers.
The families of the deceased and wounded, as well as the nationalist community in Northern Ireland, refused to accept Widgery's findings. It was not until the 1990s that new evidence led the Labour government of Tony Blair to order a new inquiry into Bloody Sunday. The exhaustive Saville Inquiry began in 1998. It drew extensively on evidence presented to the Widgery Tribunal but its findings deviated substantially from those of Widgery, which it ultimately superseded.
The findings of the Widgery Tribunal are now often regarded as discredited.
Background During an arrest operation towards the end of a civil rights march in Derry on 30 January 1972, soldiers from 1 Para shot dead 13 men, with a fourteenth dying later; many more were injured. The British Army claimed that the deceased were gunmen or nail-bombers, while local people were adamant that the dead or injured were innocent. In view of this large loss of life in a UK city, the British government moved in a "rapid and apparently decisive" manner.McLaughlin, Greg and Baker, Stephen (2016). "'Every Man an Emperor': The British Press, Bloody Sunday and the Image of the British Army", in Graham Dawson et al. (ed), The Northern Ireland Troubles in Britain: Impacts, Engagements, Legacies and Memories (Manchester, Manchester University Press), pp. 183–198 Resolutions were passed in each house of parliament at Westminster on 1 February 1972 to establish an inquiry under the Tribunals of Inquiry (Evidence) Act 1921,"Report of the Bloody Sunday Inquiry (Saville Report)", vol. I, p. 39. National Archives, 17 October 2010. Retrieved 14 June 2026 "into the events on Sunday, 30th January 1972, which led to loss of life in connection with the procession in Londonderry on that day"."Report of the Tribunal appointed to inquire into the events on Sunday, 30th January 1972, which led to loss of life in connection with the procession in Londonderry on that day (Widgery Report)". Cain web service, 2010. Retrieved 14 June 2026
Lord Widgery, lord chief justice of England, accepted a request by Heath to conduct this inquiry.David Poole, "Widgery, John Passmore, Baron Widgery (1911–1981)". The Oxford Dictionary of National Biography, 14 November 2018. Retrieved 14 June 2026
Venue and proceedings Lord Widgery was the sole member of the tribunal. Leading counsel were: for the tribunal, John Stocker QC; for the Ministry of Defence, Brian Gibbens QC; for the next of kin of twelve of the deceased and for the injured, James McSparran QC.Widgery Report, Appendix D The families of the dead and injured received limited legal representation only."House of Commons, Northern Ireland Affairs Committee. Bloody Sunday Inquiry: Oral and written evidence", p. 9. UK Parliament, 13 October 2010. Retrieved 18 June 2026
Widgery's initial intention was for the inquiry to be held in Derry, in order to encourage witnesses to give evidence: in the end, for reasons of security and convenience, his choice was the County Hall in Coleraine, a town 30 miles from Derry.Widgery Report, paragraph 5 A preliminary hearing took place on 14 February 1972 and the three weeks of main hearings went ahead from 21 February to 14 March."Bloody Sunday Inquiry: Saville has 'no regrets'". BBC News, 14 October 2010. Retrieved 18 June 2026 Closing speeches were delivered on 16–17 and 20 March at the Royal Courts of Justice in London. Widgery completed his task swiftly, finishing his report on 10 April 1972, and presented it to parliament on 19 April.
A number of witnesses planned to boycott an inquiry in which they lacked faith; however, many heeded calls to cooperate by giving written statements."'Bloody Sunday', 30 January 1972 – A Chronology of Events". Cain web service, undated. Retrieved 17 June 2026 Sixty-six civilians were called to give evidence, including seven of the wounded,Widgery Report, paragraph 8 seven clergymen, six doctors and a large number reporting on the march; for the military, 40 soldiers appeared; the testimony of eight policemen was also heard.Widgery Report, Appendix B Over 3.5 minutes of overhead footage taken by an Army helicopter was shown to the tribunal. Widgery found the many photographs taken by professional photographers on the day to be of great assistance. There was a much larger number of statements taken, from which Widgery himself decided who should be called to give evidence. Evidence was not heard from most civilian eyewitnesses."Chronology: the Widgery Report". BBC, 24 March 2000. Retrieved 14 June 2026 Raymond McClean – a doctor who had examined four of the dead – attended, expecting to give evidence, but was not called.Raymond McClean (1997). The Road to Bloody Sunday (Derry: Guildhall Press), chapter 8Maggie Scull, "Bloody Sunday, 50 Years On". History Workshop, 30 January 2022. Retrieved 14 June 2026"The Tribunal". Museum of Free Derry, 2024. Retrieved 14 June 2026"Summary and Significance of New Material. Eyewitness Statements". Cain web service, undated. Retrieved 14 June 2026
Many witnesses were requested to amplify their evidence by referring to a model of the Bogside which had been specially made. The inquiry team also asked for the creation of a set of photographs taken from above to show the trajectories of shots claimed by soldiers on Bloody Sunday.Saville Report, vol. I, p. 38 Forensics also played an important role, with the tribunal commissioning experts to determine whether any of the dead or injured had been carrying weapons. In particular, a paraffin test was used to identify any lead residues deposited by the discharge of weapons.Widgery Report, paragraph 66
Widgery heard testimony from soldiers, both officers and enlisted men, who claimed fire had been returned at gunmen or petrol- or nail-bombers. In their evidence civilians were adamant that no one who had attended the march was carrying a weapon. Other than for several senior officers, some police officers and each soldier called to give evidence did so anonymously for their security and that of their families. The military witnesses were accorded a cipher (letters of the alphabet for those who claimed to have fired live ammunition and numbers for the others).Saville Report, vol. I, p. 17 Soldiers were permitted to arrive dressed in a combat jacket with no markings and to wear dark glasses before removing them when facing Lord Widgery.Saville Report, vol. X, p. 315
Concern was expressed in the House of Commons that Lord Widgery had changed the terms of reference by restricting his inquiry to a period in time of 90 minutes and a specific geographical location in Derry: the government had previously informed the house that no restrictions would be placed on him. It was suggested that Widgery had acted in this way in response to a draft article submitted to him by The Sunday Times."Business of the House". Hansard Parliamentary Debates, HC Deb 17 February 1972 vol 831 cc616-23, 17 February 1972. Retrieved 14 June 2026 In a phone call with that paper's editor, Widgery made clear that an in-depth feature on Bloody Sunday due to be published on 6 February should not appear while he was undertaking his inquiry;Harold Evans (2009). My Paper Chase, True Stories of Vanished Times (New York: Little, Brown and Co., p. 474 he would apply the rules of contempt if these wishes were not adhered to.Saville Report, vol. I, pp. 32 and 35 The article was held back, with the paper reporting on 6 February: "The law is that until the Lord Chief Justice completes his enquiry nobody may offer to the British public any consecutive account of the events in Derry last weekend".The Sunday Times, 6 February 1972
Lord Widgery's directive also led to the suppression of a report on Bloody Sunday by The Observer newspaper that proposed to reconstruct what had taken place in Derry.Liz Curtis (1984). Ireland. The Propaganda War, the British Media and the "Battle for Hearts and Minds" (London: Pluto Press), p. 48
The detailed investigation into Bloody Sunday by The Sunday Times was not published until 23 April 1972, immediately after Widgery had reported. In 2025 The Sunday Times commented that its 1972 investigation "repudiated the Widgery Inquiry's take on the events of the day"."Insight on Bloody Sunday". The Sunday Times, 23 April 1972. Reprinted 2025. Retrieved 14 June 2026
Widgery has been accused of threatening to muzzle the British media in advance of his report being published.David Burke, "Lord Widgery, the unscrupulous judge who covered-up the murders of Bloody Sunday. How and why he did it?". Village. Ireland's political and cultural magazine, 21 April 2022. Retrieved 14 June 2026
Tribunal report Widgery's primary conclusion put the blame for the deaths on the march organisers for creating a "highly dangerous situation" where a confrontation was "almost inevitable". He also found that if the British Army had continued its "low key" policy towards intervening in the Bogside, without undertaking a major operation to detain rioters, then that Sunday afternoon might have seen no major confrontation. Soldiers, Widgery found, were shot at in Rossville Street on entering the Bogside and returned fire on identified gunmen. There was no general breakdown in discipline.Widgery Report, Summary of Conclusions, paragraph 1
While much underestimating the number of those marching – from 3,000 to 5,000, when the correct total was from 10,000 to 15,000 – Widgery agreed that its organisers had tried to avoid confrontation with the security forces.Widgery Report, paragraph 24Saville Report, vol. II, p. 78 He also concluded that with insufficient separation between peaceful marchers and rioters having been effected, the wisdom of conducting an arrest operation was "debatable".Widgery Report, paragraphs 32 and 34
Widgery, who was "accustomed to listening to witnesses", said he found the demeanour of the soldiers convincing. Noting that if the soldiers were wrong about having come under fire, "they were parties in a lying conspiracy which must have come to light in the rigorous cross-examination to which they were subjected", he preferred their evidence to that of civilians. Because the soldiers' first endeavour was simply to arrest people, "there was no reason why they should have suddenly desisted and begun to shoot unless they had come under fire themselves".Widgery Report, paragraphs 54 and 97