Independent review of bullying, harassment and sexual harassment at the Bar

In September 2025, Baroness Harriet Harman KC published her review of bullying, harassment and sexual harassment at the Bar. This was commissioned by the Bar Council in June 2024 after they stated it believed that bullying, harassment and sexual harassment was a problem at the Bar. It stated that data suggested that such behaviour was increasing and was concerned that the current regulatory framework was not effective enough for the issues to be dealt with. The purpose of the review was to make recommendations for action to reduce the levels of bullying, harassment and sexual harassment at the Bar.

Key findings

There were a number of key findings from Baroness Harman’s research. These included:

• A rising prevalence of bullying, harassment and sexual harassment at the Bar.
• Victims/observers are more likely to be female, junior, and/or from ethnic minority backgrounds.
• Those complained about are more likely to be in more senior roles.
• Cultural issues, including a culture of impunity for those in powerful positions; “collusive bystanding” of many witnessing or observing misconduct but doing nothing about it; a fear of reporting, with many feeling reporting could be career-ending and poor confidence in the complaints system.
• Judicial behaviour contributes significantly to the overall problem, with some judges being known to be bullies but nothing being done about it.

Recommendations

Following her research, Baroness Harman made 39 recommendations, as follows:

Mandatory standards, policies and training

1. The standards of behaviour relating to bullying, harassment and sexual harassment must be clear and consistent across the profession. The Bar Standards Board (BSB), the regulator of barristers, must update the Code of Conduct to provide clarity and consistency of standards so everyone knows what is expected of them.
2. Anti-bullying and anti-harassment policies should be mandatory and consistent across the profession, including across chambers, the Inns, the BSB and for consideration by the judiciary.
3. Training on bullying and harassment should be mandatory and consistent and be carried out regularly to ensure the standards of behaviour are embedded throughout the profession. Training should begin with aspiring barristers in education and should be repeated every three years for practising barristers and employees of chambers and the Inns.
4. The Bar Council’s Commissioner for Conduct should develop and deliver standardised training across the whole profession. Baronness Harman has recommended the creation of a new office, the Commissioner for Conduct, appointed by the Bar Council, who would be responsible for promoting good standards of behaviour and enforcing such good standards.

Improvement of complaints mechanisms

5. There should be a comprehensive guide to the existing complaints mechanism, produced and disseminated by the Commissioner for Conduct to all practising barristers, Bar students, pupils and chambers’ employees so there is a deeper understanding of how it works.
6. Clarity is needed as to how reports will be used. This is in relation to the Bar Council’s “Talk to Spot” programme, where anyone can report a concern about a barrister (anonymously if they wish). At present, there is uncertainty as to where (if anywhere) such reports go, and what happens after a report is made.
7. Chambers must ensure good practice and engage the support of the Commissioner for Conduct when dealing with bullying, harassment or sexual harassment cases. The use of non-disclosure agreements when dealing with such allegations should be prohibited and signing one should amount to misconduct.
8. There must be consistency of approach across the Inns in relation to bullying, harassment or sexual harassment. Although timely reports are to be encouraged, there should be no time limits on making complaints of this nature.
9. Victims and their confidants should be exempt from the duty to report serious misconduct. This should encourage confiding of such behaviour, without fear of repercussions should the victims not want to take a report further.
10. Overcoming reporting barriers. There are many parts to this issue, including:
    1. Leadership within the profession in embedding a “speak up” culture and training.
    2. Increased access to support and advice for potential complainants.
    3. Reducing the stress involved in the complaints process by ensuring fair, prompt and independent investigations and outcomes.
    4. Effective implementation of the mandatory reporting duty, especially by seniors to take the onus off victims and demonstrate zero tolerance and strong sanctions for failure to report.
    5. The BSB and Commissioner for Conduct should work together to deal with reports, to ensure the correct body deals with them.

Preventing misconduct and better protection of juniors

11. There is a need to prevent misconduct towards aspiring barristers, juniors and employees. This includes:
    1. Proper education given to students at the start of their university education in terms of the proper procedures for securing work experience, what constitutes bullying, harassment and sexual harassment and what to do should misconduct occur.
    2. Prevention policies in place to protect those undertaking work experience.
    3. It must be proscribed as serious misconduct for a member of chambers or an employee or someone in a leadership position at an Inn to have a sexual relationship with a student, mini-pupil, pupil, or anyone undertaking any form of work experience.
    4. Mini-pupillages should only take place following a formal application process within chambers and they should not take place informally.
    5. Where a pupil’s continued pupillage becomes untenable because of a bullying, harassment or sexual harassment issue that cannot be resolved by chambers, there should be a scheme in place to allow pupils to continue pupillage at another chambers.
12. The scope of professional misconduct must be clarified, and this should be reflected in the Code of Conduct.
13. The duty to report serious misconduct should be triggered upon reasonable suspicion and the sanction for failure to report should be strong (i. e. at least a suspension). There needs to be a greater sense of obligation on third parties to take action in response to hearsay and “open secrets”.
14. Protocols and data-sharing agreements are needed to ensure disclosure of protection and safeguarding concerns between relevant bodies in the profession. This is to ensure appropriate protection or safeguarding mechanisms are put in place by all bodies.

Improved investigation handling by the BSB and the Tribunal’s powers

15. The BSB must implement strict time limits for processing cases concerning bullying, harassment and sexual harassment. This is to ensure enforcement proceedings are completed in a timely manner.
16. The BSB must put in place support services for complainants and respondents involved in BSB cases concerning bullying, harassment and sexual harassment.
17. Specialist trained teams are needed in the BSB to handle sexual misconduct cases, to ensure a trauma-focussed approach.
18. Vulnerable witness training should be mandatory for persons involved in BSB cases concerning bullying, harassment or sexual harassment.
19. Regular progress updates (at least monthly) must be given to complainants and respondents involved in BSB cases concerning bullying, harassment or sexual harassment.
20. Confidentiality agreements should be signed by all parties involved in BSB investigations.
21. Anonymity orders must be dealt with promptly by the Tribunal, within 14 days of the decision to charge except in exceptional circumstances. Unless an anonymity order is made, the name of a respondent must be made public by the BSB at the time the charge is made.
22. Decisions made by the Tribunal should be published promptly, usually within four weeks following the handing down of a decision by the Tribunal. Written reports must include findings in relation to all charges, including the reasons.
23. Changes are needed to the Tribunal’s powers to award costs and compensation. These are:
    1. Where charges are proved, a respondent is to pay the BSB’s costs and where charges are summarily dismissed as not properly arguable, the BSB should pay the respondent’s costs. Consideration of a respondent’s means should not form part of this decision.
    2. Following a finding of serious misconduct, the Tribunal should have the power to award compensation to the complainant paid by the respondent.
24. Regulatory enforcement action must be taken against online bullying and harassment.
25. Sanctions for bullying, harassment and sexual harassment must operate as a deterrent, i.e. they need to be serious.
26. Findings of bullying, harassment or sexual harassment must be taken into account by relevant bodies when appointing barristers to certain leadership positions.
27. Retribution against complainants should be an aggravating factor when determining a sanction for bullying, harassment or sexual harassment.
28. The BSB’s policy on handling complaints concerning serious criminal offences should be reviewed. The policy to place investigations “on hold” whilst a criminal investigation takes place should be reviewed.

Improvement within the Judiciary

29. The judiciary should consider participating in Talk to Spot.
30. There needs to be greater accountability for conduct in the courtroom, through the implementation of an independent court monitor to attend hearings to observe behaviour in court.
31. The time limits for complaints to the Judicial Conduct Investigations Office (currently three months) should be abolished and the application of the rule on particularisation of complaints should be reviewed.
32. Accountability in court should be improved by making audio recordings of proceedings and making these available to professional court users.
33. Dialogue between the Bench and the Bar should be increased. Regular meetings between Presiding Judges and barristers should be facilitated as an opportunity to discuss judicial behaviour, identify problems and explore solutions in an informal manner.
34. Sanctions decisions following a finding of judicial misconduct should be made by the Lady Chief Justice, the Lord Chancellor, and an independent person to increase the perception of independence.
35. The Bar Council should appoint a Commissioner for Conduct to tackle bullying, harassment and sexual harassment at the Bar.

Comment

Baroness Harman’s report is a serious, wide-ranging and blunt assessment of the Bar. It identifies deep-rooted issues of bullying, harassment and sexual misconduct – especially where hierarchical imbalances exist – and lays out detailed recommendations for change.

There are a huge number of recommendations which will take some time to implement. Although these are all well-intentioned, some will be difficult to implement and indeed it is questionable whether some should be implemented at all. For example, placing investigations “on hold” pending resolution of criminal proceedings is standard in all regulatory investigations. This is to ensure that the regulatory proceedings do not prejudice the criminal proceedings. Recommendation 28 does not appear to properly address this and the reason behind the recommendation is not clear, aside from the risk to individuals and the wider profession placing an investigation “on hold” poses. However, in serious criminal investigations, a suspect may well be subject to bail conditions, which could deal with that risk. Further, although the logic behind prohibiting informal mini pupillages is understood, a number of students find it almost impossible to obtain mini pupillages, and the only way they are able to do so is through a contact they have. A better solution could perhaps be a middle ground, where an informal mini pupil still has to complete the chambers’ induction and be made aware of safeguards to protect them.

If adopted, the recommendations will need enforcement, monitoring and clear accountability. There is a risk that even if policies are created, they could be unevenly applied or ignored. Further, implementation will require resources; for new roles, managing complaints and supporting complainants. It is unclear where funding would come from.

Many people are afraid to report, or feel that doing so will damage their careers. Changing that requires more than rules – support, trust and proof that punishments will follow misconduct. It will take a long time for perceptions in this regard to change, and the implementation of new policies encouraging zero tolerance will only go some way to solving the issue.

What is clear is that change is needed. However, whether this report becomes a turning point greatly depends on how the profession responds: how quickly and robustly any recommendations are adopted, what accountability mechanisms are put in place and whether junior barristers and Bar students really feel safer in future.

Previous article

Psychotherapist fails to persuade Insolvency Court to exercise its ‘‘extraordinary’’ jurisdiction to ‘‘look behind’’ High Court defamation Judgment

Next article

Iain Wilson writes about The Lost King libel claim and artistic licence in The Law Society Gazette