I'm not totally convinced that judges etc are necessarily the right ones to reach the right conclusions, but you may have a point. The trouble in the legal system is essentially set up to be adversarial and attribute blame.
What concerns me is that when you have safety breaches, and lets face it this was the mother of all safety breaches, there is specific expertise that aims to look deeply into all the cultural, management, procedural, policy, environmental and external settings that contributed to that safety breach and in the short term identify learnings and immediate actions, and in the medium term identify all of the contributing factors and those that are most critical to address. There's specific expertise used to get to root causes (although in a workplace setting pressure from management can sometime prevent getting to these).
Also, in my experience in conducting investigations, it's not the formal investigations that bring out all the information, sometimes the informal conversations you have over coffee or in the back of a taxi that elicit really useful, honest information. Let's not kid ourselves that anyone appearing before a live streamed judicial inquiry is not well prepped to do so. There is honesty, I am sure, but stage managed honesty will be a feature of these testimonies.
