Review Reveals Failures in UK Response to Harry Dunn Case

The UK Foreign Office did not adequately respond to the case of Harry Dunn, resulting in lost opportunities to influence the United States regarding the suspect’s diplomatic immunity, according to an independent review. Launched by former Foreign Secretary David Lammy in July 2023, the report authored by Dame Anne Owers outlines significant failings in the Foreign Office’s handling of the situation following Dunn’s death in a road incident in August 2019.

Dame Anne’s findings indicate that the Foreign Office’s approach to the case was not treated as a crisis. She pointed out that there were “failings and omissions” that hindered the department’s ability to act effectively. In particular, she emphasized that the then Foreign Secretary, Dominic Raab, should have been involved much earlier in the process. Notably, a note expressing concern over potentially “unpalatable headlines” was sent to Raab’s private office just three days after the crash.

Following the incident, US authorities asserted diplomatic immunity for Anne Sacoolas, who left the UK 19 days after the crash outside RAF Croughton. The Dunn family has campaigned for justice over the last three years, even meeting with US President Donald Trump in the White House. Sacoolas eventually pleaded guilty to causing death by careless driving in December 2022 and received an eight-month prison sentence, suspended for 12 months.

Reacting to the review, Charlotte Charles, Harry Dunn’s mother, expressed deep emotions about the report’s findings. “Reading her report has been a hugely emotional experience and has triggered a lot of anger, taking it back as it does to those early days after we lost Harry,” she stated. The Dunn family had previously criticized the Foreign Office for advising US officials that they should “feel able” to send Sacoolas back to the US after the accident.

Dame Anne noted that the decision to inform the US government that they could send Sacoolas home reflected a reluctance to confront the US’s actions rather than an agreement with them. According to her review, there was a significant delay in recognizing that the situation should have been prioritized across the department. “The issue was not recognized as a crisis and escalated to a sufficiently high level at an early stage, losing opportunities to influence, rather than respond to, events,” she commented.

Additionally, the report highlighted that communication with the Dunn family was sporadic and often overshadowed by other events. The Foreign Office was slow to realize that the Dunn family could be allies in achieving justice and securing necessary changes. Dame Anne pointed out that there was an over-rigid demarcation of roles within the Foreign Office that did not capitalize on available knowledge and skills.

In her recommendations, Dame Anne called for cases involving exceptional circumstances, such as diplomatic immunity, to receive an “immediate surge of resources.” She proposed that these cases should undergo mandatory early escalation to senior officials and ministers. The review suggested that the previously established immunity agreement at RAF Croughton, which granted immunity to dependants of administrative and technical staff but not the staff themselves, should be revised and presented to Parliament.

Dame Anne’s report serves as a stark reminder of the challenges faced by the Dunn family and the shortcomings of the UK government in addressing their case. “We have carried the fear that Harry’s case was not taken seriously enough at the highest levels when it mattered most,” Charlotte Charles stated. “Dame Anne’s findings show that those fears were justified. That is incredibly painful to hear, even now.”

The Dunn family’s determination for justice underscores the need for systemic changes to ensure that future cases are handled with the urgency and sensitivity they deserve.