Backing for self-regulation

DISCIPLINARY CONFERENCE: Human Rights Act has bolstered legitimacy of tribunals

Solicitors should keep their own regulatory body, a London conference on self-regulation for various professions heard last week.

But delegates at the Disciplinary Conference agreed that media and public perception of the professions is poor, and called for co-operation between self-regulated industries.

Law Society chief executive Janet Paraskeva, one of the keynote speakers at the conference, said there was a powerful argument for self-regulation.

'In a civilised society, a strong, independent legal profession is a fundamental guarantor of the rights of citizens,' she said.

Ms Paraskeva acknowledged concern at the Society's ability to strike a proper balance between representing and regulating the profession, but she added: 'An effectively regulated profession is one that is trusted.

And if it is trusted, it will prosper.'

She acknowledged that the model of self-regulation currently in place might not be the model one would adopt if starting from first principles, but added: 'The reality is that it works.

Between the two roles of regulation and representation, there are more synergies than conflicts.'

Herbert Smith partner Andrew Lidbetter told delegates that tribunals for self-regulating professions have been under pressure to bring their procedures into line with the Human Rights Act, and especially article 6 - the right to a fair trial.

Mr Lidbetter said tribunals are now holding their hearings in public, for greater transparency, and consisted of more lay members, countering the appearance of bias.

This meant it was harder to argue that they operate as a professionals' club.

Isabel Nisbet, the director of policy at the General Medical Council, said the professional self-regulatory tribunals should work more closely together on standards and sanctions.

Chris Ludlow, a consultant with Navigator consultancy, told delegates that there would be advantages to self-regulated tribunals adopting a joint quality kite-mark, to guarantee that common standards are upheld.

Jeremy Fleming