Freddo - I wonder if they (GB) knew this added investigation was coming down the pipe a few weeks ago and this is why the Feb 2017 WT (Study copy) had that eye catching sentence about the GB in it?
If it was just a few weeks ago then I don't think so. It is months before they get an idea to put something into print and go through the whole process of having it written and checked. However, the arguments presented in that magazine were so poorly written and defended that it could have been a rush job.
The Commission mentioned a couple of times during their Case Study that they had been in private discussions with them and that there would be future discussions. I'm sure that they would have been aware of their position. They were told and encouraged to contribute any new procedures that they planned to put in place and that they would check up on them in this regard. The Commission's position has been to seek out solutions and it has been relying on the co-operation of organizations. If that's not forthcoming then they've got to seek ways of getting the best outcome that they can. The Commission, after all, has to demonstrate it's productiveness and achievements, millions of dollars are being spent and individuals working in the Commission have their own reputations at stake.
We know the attitude of the Org. is prideful, stubborn and basically non submissive and won't admit to their shortcomings. When their hand is forced they then attempt to mitigate any damage and that is probably why we saw that statement in the Watchtower. They'd have to know this was coming to them early on, certainly after their written response, which was over a year ago. If the Commission was doing its job properly (and it appears that they are) then they would have written to the Watchtower and expressed their dismay.
Their response was appalling and it reminded me of the bully kid that gets told off and just stands with his hands over his ears and pokes his tongue out. Maybe the org. is now reconsidering it's own attitude in writing that response and regret it, I'm sure there are some in the organization that would be appalled at what was written but this attitude is systemic throughout the organization.
I can't remember which poster pointed out that unlike other times when they have said that they err and are not infallible, this current statement includes the comment that it also includes organizational direction.