Mr Ronald Bean (a practising barrister) was ordered to be disbarred by a BSB disciplinary tribunal which concluded on 4 March 2025 following findings of professional misconduct in relation to charges brought by the Bar Standards Board (BSB).
The Tribunal found that, in representing Ms Rowling, Mr Bean had implicitly supported her views, namely endorsed social hierarchies, failed to support the lead character’s status as a feminist model, depicted superior races as having a moral obligation of tolerance and altruism towards lesser races, and found the portrayal of house-elves as ‘extremely troublesome’ being written as happy in their slavery. In particular, Hermione’s efforts on their behalf were considered to be naïve rather than explicitly depicting equality. In so doing, the barrister had failed to promote equality, diversity and inclusion.
Commenting on the order, a BSB spokesperson said: “Our mission is to regulate barristers and specialised legal services businesses in England and Wales in the public interest. The BSB Tribunal found that Mr Bean had acted in a way as to bring the profession into disrepute and the decision to disbar Mr Bean reflects the fact that failure to promote equality, diversity and inclusion is wholly incompatible with membership of the Bar.”
This decision is not open to appeal.
Ms Silver Skinn KC, commenting on the decision said, “The Bar of England and Wales has to waken up to the fact that barristers cannot determine what they do and who they represent. If, as a result of their inability to promote the BSB’s new standards, a barrister fails to use inclusive pronouns, denies biological sex or fails to demonstrate that their friend-group is culturally and ethnically diverse, they will be removed from the profession.”
To read more about this topic read Professor Andrew Tettenborn’s excellent article here.
With thanks to Tailor de Jure for the use of their splendid photo
Advertisements appearing within or below this post are placed by the platform not the writer. They are neither endorsed nor monetarised.
*
*
*
*
Stephen Twist's Barrister Blog 
When a regulator seeks to corral those whose very function is to work independently without fear or favour, to promote certain ethical values – we need to fear the possibilities. What would happen should the composition of the regulator change, perhaps requiring female barristers to wear headscarves rather than the traditional wigs that would be preserved for men?
That might seem a far-fetched possibility, but it makes the point that the barrister’s duty is to represent people from different backgrounds, cultures, capacities and outlooks. Once the overriding requirement on the Bar is to promote a set of cultural requirements rather than the needs and voice of their client, the Bar will no longer have credibility as a truly independent protector of liberty.