DUP's Jim Gamble Review Faces Conflict of Interest Claims as Donaldson Safeguarding Inquiry Draws Scrutiny
The Democratic Unionist Party's independent review into what the party knew about Jeffrey Donaldson's conduct, led by former child protection chief Jim Gamble of iNEQE Safeguarding Group, is facing conflict of interest claims after it emerged that Gamble's firm is simultaneously conducting a safeguarding review for the Presbyterian Church in Ireland — an institution where some of Donaldson's victims had disclosed abuse. Safeguarding expert Marcella Leonard has warned of a potential "blurring" of information between the two separate investigations, while Gamble has insisted the review will "leave no stone unturned" and will not "cover up for anyone."
Background
Jeffrey Donaldson's conviction in June 2026 for 18 counts of historical sexual offences, including rape, has triggered a cascade of institutional reviews across Northern Ireland's political and civic landscape. The crimes, committed against two victims when they were children over a period spanning from 1985 to 2008, were perpetrated across the entirety of Donaldson's political career — from his earliest years as a UUP activist through his time as a DUP MP and ultimately as party leader and First Minister. The question of what was known, by whom, and when, has become the central political and institutional issue arising from the case.
The DUP, as the party that Donaldson led from 2021 until his resignation in March 2024, faces the most direct scrutiny. The party commissioned an independent review shortly after the conviction, appointing Jim Gamble — a former senior police officer who served as the first chief executive of the Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre (CEOP) and who now runs iNEQE Safeguarding Group — to lead the examination. Gamble has a strong reputation in child protection circles, and his appointment was initially welcomed as a signal that the DUP was serious about getting to the truth.
However, the revelation that iNEQE is simultaneously conducting a safeguarding review for the Presbyterian Church in Ireland has complicated that picture. The Presbyterian Church is one of the institutions where some of Donaldson's victims had disclosed abuse — a fact that creates an obvious potential for the two reviews to intersect in ways that could compromise the independence and integrity of both.
Key Developments
Safeguarding expert Marcella Leonard, who has extensive experience in child protection in Northern Ireland, has publicly raised concerns about the potential conflict of interest. Leonard has warned that there is a risk of "blurring" between the two reviews — that information disclosed in one context could inadvertently influence the conduct of the other, or that the appearance of a conflict could undermine public confidence in both processes, regardless of whether any actual impropriety occurs.
Jim Gamble has responded robustly to the conflict of interest claims, insisting that iNEQE has robust information governance procedures in place to ensure that the two reviews are conducted entirely separately and that there is no risk of information crossing between them. He has stated that the DUP review will "leave no stone unturned" and that he will not "cover up for anyone," regardless of their political position or institutional affiliation. The DUP has backed Gamble's assurances and has indicated that it has no intention of replacing him as review chair.
The controversy has, however, added to the pressure for a full independent public inquiry — one with statutory powers to compel evidence and to examine the conduct of multiple institutions simultaneously — rather than a series of separate institutional reviews that may or may not be coordinated. The UUP, SDLP, Alliance, and Sinn Féin have all expressed support for a comprehensive public inquiry, and the question is now whether new Prime Minister Andy Burnham will agree to establish one.
Why It Matters
The conflict of interest controversy illustrates a fundamental limitation of the institutional review model as a response to a scandal of this magnitude. When a single individual's crimes span multiple institutions over four decades, no single institutional review can provide a comprehensive account of what happened and why. The DUP review can only examine what the DUP knew. The UUP review can only examine what the UUP knew. The Presbyterian Church review can only examine what the church knew. None of these reviews can examine the interactions between institutions, the flow of information between them, or the systemic failures that allowed Donaldson to move between institutions without his history following him.
Only a statutory public inquiry, with the power to compel witnesses and documents from all relevant institutions, can provide that comprehensive account. The victims and their families have been clear that this is what they want, and the growing cross-party consensus in favour of a public inquiry reflects a recognition that the institutional review model is inadequate to the scale of the scandal.
Local Impact
The ongoing controversy around the Donaldson reviews is having a tangible impact on public trust in Northern Ireland's political and civic institutions. Community and voluntary organisations working with survivors of abuse have reported increased demand for support services, and have called for additional resources to be made available. The PSNI's Public Protection Branch has confirmed that it is reviewing all information relating to the case to determine whether any further investigative action is required. Stormont's Assembly Commission has indicated that its own review into Donaldson's conduct at Parliament Buildings will be completed before the end of September.
What's Next
The DUP's Jim Gamble review has no fixed reporting date but is expected to publish interim findings before the end of 2026. The question of a full public inquiry now rests with Prime Minister Andy Burnham, who is expected to be asked about the matter during his first visit to Belfast. Safeguarding expert Marcella Leonard has indicated that she will continue to monitor the conduct of both the DUP and Presbyterian Church reviews and will raise further concerns if she believes the conflict of interest is not being adequately managed. The victims' legal representatives have written to the Attorney General for Northern Ireland requesting advice on the legal options available to them if they are not satisfied with the outcome of the institutional reviews.
