Yahoo News Clubs such as Garrick can create bias in selecting judges, Bar Council warns
Exclusive members’ clubs “create the potential for unfair advantage” for lawyers seeking to become judges, the Bar Council has warned, responding to growing unease about senior legal practitioners who are members of the men-only Garrick club.
The professional body for barristers set its comments about “closed doors and exclusionary spaces” against the background of wider concerns over the under-representation of women in the judiciary, and persistent gender disparities in female lawyers’ career progression and earnings.
Sam Townend KC, the chair of the Bar Council, the organisation that represents 18,000 barristers in England and Wales, indicated that views on the acceptability of barristers’ membership of private members’ clubs were evolving.
“For now, it is a matter for individuals to determine whether or not membership of an institution, such as the Garrick Club, is compatible with the views they espouse in their professional lives, but this may change,” Townend said.
Related: Lawyer who raised ‘boys’ club’ concerns over judgment accused of misconduct
“As a profession it is vitally important that we retain the trust and confidence of the public.”
The Bar Standards Board is responsible for publishing a code of conduct for barristers. It sets out that practitioners “must not behave in a way which is likely to diminish the trust and confidence which the public places in you or in the profession”.
The publication in the Guardian last week of a list of more than 60 influential figures within the British establishment who are members of the Garrick has caused ripples in several areas. Last Wednesday the head of MI6, Richard Moore, and the head of the civil service, Simon Case, both resigned from the club, after deciding that membership was at odds with their organisations’ commitment to improving diversity.
On Monday it emerged that at least four judges had tendered their resignations from the Garrick.
Townend’s comments follow a statement made on Monday by the lady chief justice, Sue Carr, the president of the courts and head of the judiciary of England and Wales, noting that the revelations about judges’ membership of the Garrick underlined the need to continue work to improve inclusivity in the profession.
“You will have seen the recent media coverage relating to judicial members of the Garrick Club,” Carr wrote in an internal message sent to judges. “I am alive to the issues raised, which I take very seriously. I wish to emphasise my commitment to diversity and inclusivity across the judiciary. We must continue our vital work in this area including delivering on the work outlined in our diversity and inclusion strategy.”
The roll-call of the legal profession named as members of the Garrick includes a serving supreme court judge, five appeal court judges, eight high court judges, dozens of serving and retired judges, current and former ministers in the Ministry of Justice and numerous senior solicitors, along with about 150 leading barristers.
Townend highlighted the difficulties faced by women in the law, saying: “There is a significant body of evidence showing that women working in the legal profession, at all levels, face discrimination at work. This is illustrated by the Bar Council’s own research on gender disparities in career progression, retention and earnings.
“Women barristers have told the Bar Council they have lower overall wellbeing and disproportionately experience bullying and harassment when compared to their male counterparts at work.
Related: Judges didn’t see what the fuss over Garrick Club was about – they do now
“Women barristers have not yet secured equal representation or remuneration in our profession and are under-represented in the judiciary. In this regard, the Bar Council remains committed to ensure that those who work within the justice system are more reflective of the society we serve.”
He added: “Closed doors and exclusionary spaces do not foster support or collaboration between colleagues. Where progression from the legal profession into the judiciary relies on references, they create the potential for unfair advantage.”
Jonathan Sumption, a lawyer and former justice in the supreme court and a Garrick member, told the New York Times he supported the admission of women, but dismissed the discussion of the club as trivial.
“The Garrick Club is not a public body and the whole issue is too unimportant to make a fuss of,” Sumption said. “It is still a pretty good club.”
