Translate the text from Welsh to English.



 
Bydd yr Aelodau wedi nodi'r cyhoeddiad diweddar gan yr Ymchwiliad Annibynnol Cwnsler y Frenhines fod ei waith wedi'i ohirio er mwyn disgwyl am ganlyniad yr Arolwg Barnwrol a gychwynnwyd gan deulu'r diweddar Carl Sargeant.   
  
Mae llawer iawn o ddiddordeb yn y broses hon, ac mae hynny’n gwbl briodol. Mae'r hyn a allaf ei ddweud wrth yr Aelodau'n gyfyngedig o ystyried yr Arolwg Barnwrol, ond rwy'n teimlo ei bod yn bwysig ac yn briodol rhoi diweddariad mor llawn â phosibl i’r Aelodau ar y mater hwn. Mewn perthynas â'r Arolwg Barnwrol, rydym wedi cadarnhau’n flaenorol y byddwn yn herio'n gryf yr holl seiliau y cafodd ei gyflwyno arnynt a bydd y broses gyfreithiol yn awr yn dilyn ei hynt.   
  
Bu'r broses o sefydlu'r Ymchwiliad Annibynnol hwn yn un cymhleth, a bu'n rhaid ystyried nifer o ffactorau rhyng\-gysylltiedig, gan gynnwys y gofyniad diamod i gadw cyfrinachedd yr achwynwyr.  
  
Cyhoeddais Ymchwiliad Cwnsler y Frenhines ar 10 Tachwedd 2017 gan ddefnyddio fy mhwerau o dan adrannau 48 a 71 o Ddeddf Llywodraeth Cymru. Yn dilyn hyn, rhoddais gylch gwaith pendant i'r Ysgrifennydd Parhaol wneud trefniadau gweithredol i fwrw ymlaen â hyn ar y sail na fyddai'n ymchwiliad cyhoeddus, ac y byddai’n rhaid i gyfrinachedd yr achwynwyr gael blaenoriaeth. Nodais yn glir, ar y sail hon, y dylai'r ymchwiliad gael ei gynnal hyd braich oddi wrthyf fi a'm swyddfa.  
  
Drafftiwyd Protocol Gweithredol gan yr Ysgrifennydd Parhaol a'i thîm cyfreithiol a oedd yn diwallu'r cylch gwaith yn llawn. Roedd hefyd yn cynnwys mesurau diogelu sylweddol i sicrhau cyfrinachedd y tystion a'r wybodaeth sy'n gysylltiedig â'r Ymchwiliad. Rhoddwyd rhestr fer o dri Chwnsler y Frenhines uchel eu parch o'r tu allan i Gymru i’r teulu Sargeant a gofynnwyd i'w dewis cyntaf, Paul Bowen CF, gynnal yr ymchwiliad ar sail y Protocol Gweithredol fel y'i drafftiwyd. Dywedodd Mr Bowen CF nad oedd dim yn ei rwystro rhag ymgymryd â'r rôl, yn seiliedig ar y Protocol Gweithredol.   
  
Er mwyn bod yn dryloyw, cafodd y protocol ei ddosbarthu gan yr Ysgrifennydd Parhaol i holl Aelodau'r Cynulliad ym mis Ionawr. Yn unol â'i gylch gwaith fel cadeirydd yr ymchwiliad, aeth Mr Bowen CF ati i drafod cylch gorchwyl arfaethedig ei ymchwiliad â'r teulu Sargeant. Drwy Mr Bowen, gofynnodd y teulu am gael gwneud diwygiad i'r telerau er mwyn egluro cwmpas yr ymchwiliad, a chytunodd yr Ysgrifennydd Parhaol â hynny.   
  
Ar wahân, gofynnodd Mr Bowen CF am gyfres o newidiadau sylweddol i’r Protocol Gweithredol. Fel Cadeirydd yr Ymchwiliad, roedd hawl ganddo ef wneud hynny wrth reswm. Roedd y newidiadau arfaethedig yn mynd ymhell tu hwnt i’r cylch gwaith roeddwn i wedi’i roi i’r Ysgrifennydd Parhaol, ac felly eglurodd hithau yn glir wrth Mr Bowen CF nad oedd ganddi’r awdurdod i gytuno arnynt, ac y byddai’n rhaid iddi eu cyfeirio yn ôl ataf i fel y Prif Weinidog.  
  
Yn dilyn trafodaethau dwys ac adeiladol rhwng Mr Bowen CF a’r Ysgrifennydd Parhaol, gan gynnwys y cyngor cyfreithiol allanol a gafodd Llywodraeth Cymru, cefais gyngor ffurfiol ar y newidiadau arfaethedig. Cytunais â’r rhan fwyaf o geisiadau Mr Bowen, gan gynnwys disgresiwn i’r cadeirydd alluogi i aelodau’r teulu Sargeant a’u cynrychiolwyr cyfreithiol fod yn bresennol yn ystod y cwestiynau, ar yr amod y byddai sicrwydd ynghylch cyfrinachedd yr achwynwyr ac unrhyw dystiolaeth a allai olygu bod perygl iddynt gael eu hadnabod.   
  
Wedi dod i gytundeb ynghylch y Protocol Gweithredol ar ei newydd wedd, dywedais wrth yr ymchwiliad y byddwn yn sicrhau fy mod ar gael ar gyfer sesiynau tystiolaeth lafar ar unrhyw adeg. Awgrymodd Mr Bowen gyfres o ddyddiadau ar gyfer y rhain i’w cynnal ym mis Medi ond awgrymodd y teulu Sargeant, fodd bynnag, na fyddai eu bargyfreithiwr ar gael ar gyfer y dyddiadau hyn, ac felly byddai’n rhaid dod o hyd i ddyddiadau diweddarach.     
  
Ar 25 Mehefin, derbyniom lythyr protocol cyn\-gweithredu oddi wrth cyfreithwyr y teulu Sargeant yn dweud eu bod yn bwriadu mynd ar drywydd Adolygiad Barnwrol mewn perthynas ag elfennau o’r Protocol Gweithredol. Ysgrifennodd Mr Bowen CF at yr Ysgrifennydd Parhaol ym mis Gorffennaf i ddatgan, yng ngoleuni ansicrwydd a achoswyd gan yr Adolygiad Barnwrol, ei fod yn gofyn yn ffurfiol am estyniad i’r amserlen chwe mis ar gyfer cyflwyno ei adroddiad sydd wedi’i nodi yn y Protocol Gweithredol, a chytunwyd ar hyn.    
  
Cyhoeddodd Mr Bowen CF, yn amodol ar ganlyniad yr Adolygiad Barnwrol, ei fod yn bwriadu cynnal sesiynau tystiolaeth ym mis Mawrth neu Ebrill y flwyddyn nesaf. Rwyf innau wedi dweud bob amser y byddaf yn sicrhau fy mod i ar gael i roi tystiolaeth ar unrhyw adeg, a bydd hyn yn parhau wrth gwrs wedi i’m cyfnod fel Prif Weinidog ddod i ben.     
  
Rwy’n gobeithio bod y datganiad hwn yn ddefnyddiol i Aelodau o ran egluro rhywfaint o’r cefndir i’r sefyllfa bresennol. Rwy’n cydnabod nad oes unrhyw un am weld yr oedi hwn. Mae’n cael effaith ar bawb sydd ynghlwm wrth yr achos trasig hwn, yn enwedig teulu Carl. Myfi fy hun gyhoeddodd bod angen yr ymchwiliad hwn a fy nymuniad i, gymaint ag unrhyw un arall, yw y byddai’r broses hon wedi dod i’w therfyn erbyn hyn. Fodd bynnag, mae’n rhaid gwneud pethau’n iawn ac mewn ffordd sy’n sicrhau bod pob unigolyn a gyflwynodd gŵyn yn cael aros yn anhysbys.  





Translation:


 
Members will have noted the recent announcement from the Independent QC Investigation that its work has been suspended pending the outcome of the Judicial Review initiated by the family of the late Carl Sargeant.  

  

There is rightly a significant amount of interest in this process. I am constrained in what I can say to Members in the light of the Judicial Review, but I feel it is important and appropriate to provide as full an update as possible to Members on this matter. In relation to the Judicial Review, we have previously confirmed that we will be strongly contesting all the grounds on which it is being brought and the legal process will now take its course.  

  

The process of setting up the IQCI has been complex, and has had to take into account a number of inter\-related factors, including among other things the absolute requirement to maintain the confidentiality of the complainants.  

  

I announced the QC Investigation on 10 November 2017, using my powers under s 48 and s 71 of the Government of Wales Act. Following this, I gave the Permanent Secretary a clear remit to make the operational arrangements to take it forward on the basis that it would not be a public inquiry, and that the confidentiality of the complainants must take precedence. I made it clear that the implementation of the investigation on this basis should take place at arm’s length from me and my office.  

  

The Permanent Secretary and her legal team drafted an Operational Protocol which met the remit in full, and contained substantial safeguards for the confidentiality of witnesses and information related to the Investigation. A shortlist of three highly respected QCs based outside Wales was provided to the Sargeant family and their first choice, Paul Bowen QC, was approached to undertake the investigation on the basis of the Operational Protocol as drafted. Mr Bowen QC indicated there was no impediment to him taking up the role, based on the Operational Protocol.  

  

In the interests of transparency, the protocol was circulated by the Permanent Secretary to all Assembly Members in January. In line with his remit as chair of the investigation, Mr Bowen QC discussed proposed terms of reference for his investigation with the Sargeant family. An amendment to the terms to clarify the scope of the investigation was requested by the family through Mr Bowen and agreed by the Permanent Secretary.  

  

Mr Bowen QC requested a further series of significant changes to the Operational Protocol, which as Chair of the Investigation he was of course entitled to do. The proposed changes went well beyond the remit that I had given to the Permanent Secretary, and therefore she made clear to Mr Bowen QC that she did not have the authority to agree them, and would have to refer them back to me as First Minister.  

  

Following intensive and constructive discussions between Mr Bowen QC and the Permanent Secretary, including the involvement of outside counsel retained by the Welsh Government, I was provided with formal advice on the proposed changes, and agreed to the majority of Mr Bowen’s requests, including discretion for the chair to enable the Sargeant family and their legal representatives to be present during questioning, subject to assurances about the confidentiality of the complainants and any evidence that might risk identifying them.  

  

Once agreement had been reached on the revised Operational Protocol, I indicated to the investigation that I would make myself available for oral evidence sessions at any time. A series of dates for these were proposed by Mr Bowen to take place in September, however, the Sargeant family indicated their barrister would be unavailable for these dates, so later ones would have to be found.  

  

On 25 June, we received a pre\-action protocol letter from the Sargeant family’s solicitors indicating that they intended to pursue a Judicial Review in relation to elements of the Operation Protocol.  Mr Bowen QC wrote to the Permanent Secretary in July indicating that, in light of the uncertainties caused by the Judicial Review, he was formally requesting an extension to the six month timescale for delivery of his report which is set out in the Operational Protocol, and this was agreed.  

  

Mr Bowen QC has announced that, subject to the outcome of the Judicial Review process, he intends to hold evidence sessions in March or April next year. I have indicated throughout that I will make myself available to give evidence at any time, and this will of course continue after my tenure as First Minister comes to an end.  

  

I hope this statement is useful to Members in terms of setting out some of the background to the current situation. I recognise that nobody wants these delays. It is having an impact on everyone involved in this tragic case, not least Carl’s family. I was the one who announced the need for this investigation and, as much as anyone, I wish this process had reached a conclusion by now. However, this must be done properly and in a way that does not compromise the anonymity of the people who came forward with complaints.