Former defence minister Sir Gerald Howarth is latest figure to express disquiet about Sir John and accused him of ‘sticking up two fingers’

They want to force Sir John Chilcot to publish his report into the war

Families of British troops killed in Iraq have launched new legal battle

The chairman of the inquiry into the disastrous Iraq War was last night told to step out of his ‘ivory tower’ and explain why his long-awaited report had been delayed.

Sir John Chilcot was accused of treating the grieving families of British soldiers killed in the conflict with ‘utter contempt’ by staying silent.

Bereaved relatives were being kept in a ‘terrible limbo’ because the Iraq Inquiry chairman was ignoring their pleas to reveal the truth about why their sons and daughters were sent to fight by Tony Blair, said a leading MP.

Scroll down for video

Sir John Chilcot has been accused of treating the grieving families of British soldiers killed in the Iraq War with ‘utter contempt’ by staying silent when asked why his long-awaited report has been delayed. Former Tory defence minister Sir Gerald Howarth (right) accused him of ‘sticking up two fingers’ at the families

Former Prime Minister, Tony Blair, addressing the Chilcot Iraq Inquiry, in central London January 28, 2010

Former Tory defence minister Sir Gerald Howarth became the latest senior figure to express disquiet about Sir John, accusing him of ‘sticking up two fingers’ at the families.

Central to the delays are the controversial ‘Maxwellisation’ letters – named after a case involving disgraced newspaper tycoon Robert Maxwell – which gives those facing criticism in inquiries a pre-publication right of reply.

Critics say giving witnesses the right to rebut failings in detail has effectively allowed them to block indefinitely the report into the war, which cost 179 British lives.

Sir John has refused to answer questions about how many letters he has sent, when they were posted and why he has allowed the process to drag on – prolonging the suffering of devastated families.

KEY WITNESS 'FLABBERGASTED' BY WAIT FOR LETTER A key witness to the inquiry was ‘flabbergasted at how late’ they were invited to take part in the controversial Maxwellisation process. The high-profile figure did not receive a letter until March – at least five months after they began being sent out, a source told the Daily Mail. The convention allows anyone accused of failings an opportunity to respond to those criticisms before a report is published. Up to 150 individuals from Chilcot are thought to have received the warning letters. One of these figures, who was central to the decision to enter the Iraq War, revealed how another pivotal figure was left ‘astonished’ after receiving his letter in March. The source said: ‘When this individual received the letter in March they were left totally stunned and flabbergasted at how late it was.’ They said that the ‘big player’ was particularly troubled after receiving the letter because they had a considerable amount of information to compile as part of their response. Advertisement

Questioned by the Daily Mail about the reasons for the shocking delays, Sir John said he could not answer because it was a ‘confidential process’.

Asked about the families’ feelings, he replied: ‘No comment.’

Sir Gerald said: ‘I feel very strongly that Sir John Chilcot cannot sit in his ivory tower completely immune to the concerns of the families and the public. He has had four years: Time is now up.

‘I think it is pretty offensive that he is refusing to comment on why these delays are occurring. We want to know.

‘He is betraying the families and showing them utter contempt. He is sticking up two fingers to anyone who is expressing any concerns about the delays to the report, yet these concerns are completely legitimate.

'It seems he has forgotten there is a human angle to this and leaving families in a terrible limbo is not acceptable.’

Sir John, a 76-year-old retired civil servant, has not been seen since the Mail revealed that 29 families had started an unprecedented legal battle to force him to publish his report by the end of the year.

He was this week dubbed the ‘Man With No Conscience’ for failing to ensure the report was published quickly for the sake of grieving relatives.

The chairman, whose probe has cost more than £10million, has faced mounting criticism for his refusal to give ‘straight answers’ to questions about hold-ups.

The inquiry convened in 2009 and finished taking evidence from witnesses, including Tony Blair, Alastair Campbell and former spy chief Sir John Scarlett, in 2011.

Killed: Corporal Kris O'Neill (pictured left) and Major Matthew Bacon (right) both died in Iraq

Roger Bacon, whose son Major Matthew Bacon, 34, died in a bomb blast in Basra ten years ago, said: ‘Before Sir John started taking evidence, he met the families and made a promise that he would get to the bottom of things for us. To keep us hanging on is not on.’

David Godfrey, the grandfather of Rifleman Daniel Coffey, 21, shot on patrol in Iraq in 2007, said: ‘We have had no answers. When you continually ask questions that are important to you, and you receive no believable answer, you reach the stage of despair and that desperation evolves into anger. That is the stage we have now reached.’

Matthew Jury of McCue & Co solicitors, which is representing the families, said Sir John’s refusal to explain was ‘unreasonable and, given their suffering, nothing short of contemptuous’.

The families have given Sir John a two-week deadline to set a date for releasing the report or they will apply for judicial review.

An inquiry spokesman said Sir John would not comment.

NINE QUESTIONS... BUT NO COMMENT

He has been dubbed the ‘Man With No Conscience’ for keeping the families of the Iraq War dead in limbo over his long-overdue report. But yesterday Sir John Chilcot was the man with no comment after he refused to answer a single question about the reason for the delays.

The following are nine key questions put to his office by the Daily Mail in consultation with the bereaved relatives – and Sir John’s exact answers:

1. When was the first so-called Maxwellisation letter sent out by the inquiry?

2. To how many individuals have Maxwellisation letters been sent?

3. Have all the witnesses who testified at the Iraq Inquiry hearings been sent a Maxwellisation letter?

4. After an initial response to a letter, how many witnesses have engaged in any further correspondence with the Iraq Inquiry?

5. Has all correspondence with witnesses been completed and, if not, how many witnesses are still engaged in the Maxwellisation process?

The answer to all five questions was: ‘Sir John has made clear that Maxwellisation is a confidential process.’

Bereaved parents are disgusted their suffering is being dragged out while Sir John (pictured) gives leading figures in the inquiry, such as Mr Blair, the chance to rebut its findings – a process known as Maxwellisation

6. Is Sir John intending to respond to the legal letter sent by solicitors on behalf of the families of military personnel killed in Iraq and, if so, when?

7. Is Sir John intending to respond to criticisms made by the families and, if not, why not?

8. The families who Sir John met at the start of the inquiry claim he has broken his promise to finish it quickly. What does he say to this?

The answer to each of these three questions was: ‘No comment.’

9. Is Sir John working this week or is he on holiday?