We're getting a new report because everybody found out that the first report was a quick and dirty hatchet job to tidy up some very inconvenient political problems.
The new report will be another attempt to explain what happened, and why, seven years ago. So even if the report deals objectively and factually with the systemic issues within the operator, the regulator, the air navigation service providers and the meteorological forecasters that contributed to the accident, those are all circumstances that prevailed seven years ago.
You don't seriously think that the new report will contain any material that could justify some kind of legal or regulatory or administration action within or against or by any organisation or person involved, seven years later?