If MB took the view that commercial expediency outweighed any other considerations, that was their decision and their's alone.
That could be the case, but this trial, brought about by HSE has to be about serving public interest. It is not in the public interest, or most importantly those of the Cunningham family, if the judge does not take action. I am not a lawyer, but it is my understanding that;
(1) As the law stands at present the judge (or magistrate) are permitted - and sometimes expected - to intervene on their own initiative when it is necessary to prevent the normal adversarial process resulting in inaccurate fact finding and consequent injustice.
(2) Where after a guilty plea the prosecution and defence present an "agreed version" of the facts for the judge to sentence on, he/she may reject it if he/she thinks it is implausible and have his/her own investigation.
DV