Bar diversity row: is it enough for barristers not to discriminate or should they actively boost inclusion?

Avatar photo

By Legal Cheek on

9

Change in barristers’ duty contemplated


A new proposal by the barrister’s regulator, the BSB, could see all barristers placed under a positive duty to “act in a way that advances equality, diversity and inclusion”.

The rule change, if implemented, would see the existing duty to “not discriminate unlawfully against any person” scrapped and a higher standard imposed on the self-employed profession.

The new idea has been proposed by the BSB as part of an open consultation running into November. Despite the document only being published for a matter of days, however, the Bar Council has already made known its concerns, promising to “scrutinise the consultation carefully”.

The consultation reads:

“The current core duty requires barristers not to ‘discriminate unlawfully’. However, in order to achieve the culture change needed, we believe the duty needs to go further.”

“We believe it should be a core expectation of all practising barristers that they demonstrate an appropriate commitment, through their practice, to equality, diversity and inclusion. This will form the basis of our future regulatory action in this area and will be central to achieving behaviour and culture change across the profession.”

Sign up now to Legal Cheek‘s October 2024 Virtual Pupillage Fair

Beyond creating a new duty on barristers, the consultation document proposes new “set clear outcomes” that the regulator expects barristers to “take reasonable steps to promote”.

These include eliminating unlawful discrimination and advancing equality of opportunities in recruitment, retention, and progression, preventing bullying, harassment, and victimisation, ensuring equal access to their services, and promoting an inclusive culture.

Commenting on the proposal, Sam Townend KC, Chair of the Bar Council, said: “The Bar Council is deeply committed to supporting and improving equality, diversity and inclusion at the Bar. While much progress has been made — thanks to the work of individuals, chambers, Inns, specialist bar associations and others — there is clearly much more to be done.”

“Providing an effective regulatory framework on EDI is essential”, Townend continued, emphasising that “any regulations must be evidence-based and provide clarity to barristers and chambers.”

Making clear his concern, however, the silk noted that “radical change is certainly disruptive and may have unintended detrimental consequences.”

The Bar Council has not been shy about its disapproval of outcome-based regulation in the past, stating earlier this year that it has “significant challenges”.

Indeed, the representative body has previously said: “Self-employed barristers in chambers tend to have limited time. Any system of regulation needs to be as clear and easy to follow as possible. Outcomes without clear rules or processes are ambiguous and lead to uncertainty as well as being perceived as difficult to comply with.”

9 Comments

Compost of Counsel

Ah! Compelled speech!

Slippery slope…?

Auntie Woake

“There is much more to be done” is the mantra of the DEI industry. Don’t expect them to produce coherent evidence to back that up. A few self-selecting panel discussion based reports and references to appointments based on those who entered the profession decades ago don’t form a credible basis to bleat “more needs to be done”.

Anon

Dreadful idea. Undefined and undefinable. I had thought the BSB was going to be better than the SRA, which dragged itself into the current debate and came out the other side particularly woke. The BSB seemed more independent and elegant in its previous responses to calls to get involved more in EDI rules for Barristers. Many of us are entirely inclusive and respectful of others as it is, we needn’t have more rules attempting to compel our speech and actions, especially when it’s vaguely written and a poor attempt at something entirely subjective. I have been subjected to plenty of disability discrimination from various people and organisations, both within and outside of the legal profession, but this is not the way to resolve it and ensure it doesn’t happen again.

Just Anonymous

I strongly object to any suggestion that, as a barrister, I am obliged to “demonstrate an appropriate commitment, through [my] practice, to equality, diversity and inclusion.”

What I am obliged to do – legally and morally – is carry out my practice in accordance with equality law. In practical terms, this means not discriminating, bullying or otherwise acting with prejudice towards others. In more specific terms, the service that I provide to my clients – and the way that I treat my professional colleagues – is not affected by their protected characteristics (except that I will make reasonable adjustments where appropriate).

Frankly, as long as that is my position – and in the absence of any evidence that I behave otherwise – I do not consider that my professional regulator has any right to demand more of me.

Indeed, the suggestion that I am required to ‘demonstrate’ such conduct rather reminds me of the kind of behaviour Joseph Heller so brilliantly lampooned through Catch 22’s ‘Great Loyalty Oath Crusade’ – where demonstrating public adherence to a particular position was more important than whether people actually believed it.

Finally, I am responsible and accountable for my conduct only. If the BSB is trying to suggest that I should owe a duty to ‘fight’ the prejudice/discrimination/bullying/victimisation that it perceives exists within the Bar, then the BSB is wrong. I am (rightly) required to report such conduct, but that is as far as it goes (and should go). I am a lawyer, not a moral crusader.

Robert Ward

Sorry Mrs Shah, I can’t represent you because you’ve been accused of discrimination against a disabled person.

Sorry Mr Smith, I’ve represented too many white males so far this year so I’m going to have to return the instruction in order to represent a minority client instead to promote EDI

(Not) The BSB

Now you’ve got the hang of it!

Anonymous

I assume that this duty will extend to addressing the lack of males entering the bar? Or are some types of equality more equal than others?

Cal Ander

Is it 1st April?

Anon

Defund the BSB.

Join the conversation

Related Stories

Barrister's wig and gown

21 handy tips for pupil barristers

After recently completing pupillage, Greg Lawton shares some helpful advice

Aug 27 2024 8:18am
4
Bangladesh flag

Civil unrest could lead to suspension of bar exams in Bangladesh

UK regulator 'closely monitoring' situation

Aug 8 2024 8:02am

Revealed: The Bar Courses with the highest pass rates

Bar Standards Board's latest data release well worth a look for aspiring barristers

Jul 22 2024 7:56am
9