*/
Is the Judicial Conduct Investigations Office process fit for purpose? Women barristers’ experiences of bullying are not being reported or, if they are, they are not making it through the system, says Tana Adkin KC
Judges are bullying and harassing barristers – many of them women – and getting away with it. Baroness Harriet Harman KC, who led the independent review commissioned by the Bar Council into bullying, harassment and sexual harassment at the Bar of England and Wales, concluded in September 2025:
‘The problem is the culture of impunity for those at the top who commit misconduct. Those who are subjected to it feel unable to complain. All the jeopardy is on them. Those in powerful positions… in the judiciary who choose to engage in bullying, harassment or sexual harassment can be pretty confident that nothing will be done about it. And that is what must change. The jeopardy must change from the victim to the perpetrator.’
Harman considered that the judiciary hadn’t accepted that some judges bullied barristers in their courts. The review, however, had received ‘abundant, disturbing and compelling accounts of judicial bullying’, the number and character of which, from different courts and areas, could not all be misunderstandings. Often no formal complaints were made ‘for fear of repercussions’ and at the 2025 Bar Conference Harman said she was concerned about ‘misogynistic bullying which has a harassment element in relation to women’ (‘Harman tells judges: You have a “clear” bullying problem’, Catherine Baksi, 9 June 2025, Legal Futures).
Judicial conduct that produces intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating or offensive conditions for barristers amounts to harassment (Equality Act 2010, s 26) and if related to a barrister’s sex is also discrimination (EA 2010, Pt 2, Ch 2).
The Bar Council’s Barristers’ Working Lives Survey 2023 found that of 1,233 barristers who reported they saw or experienced bullying and/or harassment, the most frequent perpetrators (53%) were ‘a member of the judiciary’ (para 8.4). Roughly half the records from the Bar Council’s ‘Talk to Spot’ confidential online tool concerned judicial behaviour that included ‘misuse of power, unnecessary tone and abuse, rudeness, overbearing behaviour, berating and being shouted at and inappropriate language’ (Barristers Working Lives Report 2023, Bar Council 2024).
In written submissions to the Harman Review, female barristers complained of judges at one court centre having a bullying culture with behaviour so rude and unprofessional that court staff were concerned (Women in Criminal Law written submission BH0185). Another example cited was a tribunal judge with a reputation for bullying junior female barristers who ignored a female barrister, speaking only to her male counterpart.
Bar Council reports included a judge:
One female junior, when asked why she would not formally complain, told the Harman Review:
‘I would have to identify myself. I want to be a KC and a judge one day. … it feels useless…. I would never report without confidentiality and anonymity … ’
A complaint to the Judicial Conduct Investigations Office (JCIO) must be made within three months, cannot relate to decision-making, is not anonymous and is passed to the judge first for comment (the Judicial Conduct Rules 2023).
Harman reported that one female barrister’s complaint to the JCIO (a judge told her to ‘sit down’, shouted at her and spoke to her in a patronising way) was dismissed because the remarks were not time-stamped and were part of ‘case management’.
The JCIO’s latest annual report, published in January 2026, shows that of 3,279 complaints received by the JCIO from April 2024 to March 2025, 2,718 (83%) were rejected because they did not meet the criteria for assessment and 57 complaints were rejected for being out of time. Only 89 complaints were upheld (2.7%). Of 36 complaints categorised as ‘bullying and/or harassment’ only 2 were upheld. Of 118 complaints for ‘displaying anger or aggression’ 6 were upheld and out of 227 complaints of ‘rudeness’, 8 were upheld.
Although a new regime was introduced in October 2023 (which included expanding the JCIO remit to include tribunal judges and non-legal members), it is impossible to know how many complaints are from barristers or are from women because the JCIO does not record data in a way it could automatically filter by gender or type of complainants. (Letter from Simon Parsons, JCIO Head of Operations to Baroness Harriet Harman KC, 13 May 2025.)
I examined the disciplinary reports published online by the JCIO. In the calendar year of 2024 (January to December) there were 18 upheld complaints of what could be described as bullying and/or harassment type behaviour, the vast majority involved male judges with 6 being senior judges (4 judges, including 1 High Court judge, and 2 coroners).*
In the calendar year of 2025, 7 of 17 similar upheld complaints involved female judges with not a single upheld complaint of bullying and/or harassment against a senior male judge.*
This misconduct was mostly punished with formal advice. In three instances, judges sanctioned previously for misconduct received a warning. In 2024 a High Court judge who abused his position trying to have a romantic relationship with an unwilling junior female staff member received a reprimand.
So far, in the calendar year of 2026 (January and February) three complaints have been upheld relating to what could be described as bullying and/or harassing behaviour. One magistrate was issued formal advice for misconduct for shouting at a member of staff (JCIO Statement 8425), another for making gestures, whispering to the chairperson and shouting at a complainant causing them to feel humiliated and tearful (JCIO Statement 6425). An employment judge was also given formal advice for raising his voice on several occasions and interrupting a complainant during cross-examination which created a hostile environment for the complainant (JCIO Statement 6325). All three judges were male but only in one case do we know for certain that the complainant was female.
The data indicate that women barristers’ experiences of bullying are not being reported or, if they are, they are not finding their way through the system.
Harman proposed that the judiciary use a tool like ‘Talk to Spot’ for anonymous reporting, install court monitoring, remove the time limit and obtain audio recordings for all professional court users (review recommendations 30-35).
She also recommended that sanction decisions include an independent person to tackle the perception of judges marking their own homework.
Responding to the review, the Lady Chief Justice said that the judiciary would review routes to complain and also work to challenge unacceptable behaviour:
‘… While the majority of judges behave professionally and courteously, Baroness Harman’s review refers to too many examples of judicial bullying. Such behaviour is unacceptable and should have no place in our justice system...
We need to give those who experience bullying, harassment or discrimination the confidence to speak up knowing that something will be done and that their own career will not suffer.’
The JCIO process is not fit for purpose if female barristers won’t use it to report bullying, harassment or discrimination. Despite the courts in England and Wales having vast experience in supporting complainants who report all kinds of abuse, they have yet to put their own house in order.
Harman’s recommendations echo tools we know support complainants: using technology for recording and transcribing hearings, anonymity for complainants, no time limit and collection of independent complaints that support each other. These tools, including ‘Talk to Spot’, are within reach.
I would add that if the JCIO recorded gender, ethnicity or disability of complainants this would help monitor trends. The sooner the JCIO sets up these tools, the sooner we will shift the jeopardy onto those responsible for unacceptable behaviour. After all, good judges have nothing to fear from a complaints system that actively supports complainants.
2024: Female judges’ behaviour included critical remarks, rudely interrupting or speaking in an inappropriate tone.
2024: Male judges’ behaviour included inappropriate language, aggressive behaviour, being over-familiar, racial harassment, shouting, discourteous and disrespectful behaviour, sending a romantic letter to a junior member of staff and attempting to have a relationship, sarcasm, interruption, rudeness, irritation and contempt.
2025: Female judges’ behaviour included insensitive remarks, inappropriate language and desk banging, raising their voice and shouting, rude dismissive and unprofessional comments, lacking respect and undermining professionals.
2025: Male judges’ behaviour included wrongly referring to a sexual abuse case, being rude, combative and aggressive, ranting at staff and interrupting a court session, speaking to staff in a stern, belittling and intimidating manner, being discourteous, expressing homophobic views, being dismissive and unprofessional, making inappropriate comments and a sexist remark, being aggressive and referring to a female colleague as a ‘trolley dolly’ and undermining her.
Statement of Expected Behaviour, January 2023
The Judicial Guide to Conduct, revised July 2023
The Judicial Discipline (Prescribed Procedures) Regulations 2023
The Judicial Conduct Rules 2023
The Judicial Conduct (Magistrates) Rules 2023
Independent review of bullying, harassment and discrimination at the Bar of England and Wales, Baroness Harriet Harman, September 2025
Barristers’ Working Lives Report 2023, Bar Council 2024
Letter from Simon Parsons, Head of Operations, JCIO to Baroness Harriet Harman KC, 13 May 2025
Lady Chief Justice’s response to the Harman Review, 8 September 2025
.jpeg?sfvrsn=5ea8bead_2)
Tana Adkin KC is a barrister. She is former Chair of the Criminal Bar Association, Deputy Head of 15NBS Chambers, London, Secretary to the Bâtonnières du monde (International Association of Women Bar Leaders), Paris and Legal Adviser to the FFLM Forensic Science Committee.
Judges are bullying and harassing barristers – many of them women – and getting away with it. Baroness Harriet Harman KC, who led the independent review commissioned by the Bar Council into bullying, harassment and sexual harassment at the Bar of England and Wales, concluded in September 2025:
‘The problem is the culture of impunity for those at the top who commit misconduct. Those who are subjected to it feel unable to complain. All the jeopardy is on them. Those in powerful positions… in the judiciary who choose to engage in bullying, harassment or sexual harassment can be pretty confident that nothing will be done about it. And that is what must change. The jeopardy must change from the victim to the perpetrator.’
Harman considered that the judiciary hadn’t accepted that some judges bullied barristers in their courts. The review, however, had received ‘abundant, disturbing and compelling accounts of judicial bullying’, the number and character of which, from different courts and areas, could not all be misunderstandings. Often no formal complaints were made ‘for fear of repercussions’ and at the 2025 Bar Conference Harman said she was concerned about ‘misogynistic bullying which has a harassment element in relation to women’ (‘Harman tells judges: You have a “clear” bullying problem’, Catherine Baksi, 9 June 2025, Legal Futures).
Judicial conduct that produces intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating or offensive conditions for barristers amounts to harassment (Equality Act 2010, s 26) and if related to a barrister’s sex is also discrimination (EA 2010, Pt 2, Ch 2).
The Bar Council’s Barristers’ Working Lives Survey 2023 found that of 1,233 barristers who reported they saw or experienced bullying and/or harassment, the most frequent perpetrators (53%) were ‘a member of the judiciary’ (para 8.4). Roughly half the records from the Bar Council’s ‘Talk to Spot’ confidential online tool concerned judicial behaviour that included ‘misuse of power, unnecessary tone and abuse, rudeness, overbearing behaviour, berating and being shouted at and inappropriate language’ (Barristers Working Lives Report 2023, Bar Council 2024).
In written submissions to the Harman Review, female barristers complained of judges at one court centre having a bullying culture with behaviour so rude and unprofessional that court staff were concerned (Women in Criminal Law written submission BH0185). Another example cited was a tribunal judge with a reputation for bullying junior female barristers who ignored a female barrister, speaking only to her male counterpart.
Bar Council reports included a judge:
One female junior, when asked why she would not formally complain, told the Harman Review:
‘I would have to identify myself. I want to be a KC and a judge one day. … it feels useless…. I would never report without confidentiality and anonymity … ’
A complaint to the Judicial Conduct Investigations Office (JCIO) must be made within three months, cannot relate to decision-making, is not anonymous and is passed to the judge first for comment (the Judicial Conduct Rules 2023).
Harman reported that one female barrister’s complaint to the JCIO (a judge told her to ‘sit down’, shouted at her and spoke to her in a patronising way) was dismissed because the remarks were not time-stamped and were part of ‘case management’.
The JCIO’s latest annual report, published in January 2026, shows that of 3,279 complaints received by the JCIO from April 2024 to March 2025, 2,718 (83%) were rejected because they did not meet the criteria for assessment and 57 complaints were rejected for being out of time. Only 89 complaints were upheld (2.7%). Of 36 complaints categorised as ‘bullying and/or harassment’ only 2 were upheld. Of 118 complaints for ‘displaying anger or aggression’ 6 were upheld and out of 227 complaints of ‘rudeness’, 8 were upheld.
Although a new regime was introduced in October 2023 (which included expanding the JCIO remit to include tribunal judges and non-legal members), it is impossible to know how many complaints are from barristers or are from women because the JCIO does not record data in a way it could automatically filter by gender or type of complainants. (Letter from Simon Parsons, JCIO Head of Operations to Baroness Harriet Harman KC, 13 May 2025.)
I examined the disciplinary reports published online by the JCIO. In the calendar year of 2024 (January to December) there were 18 upheld complaints of what could be described as bullying and/or harassment type behaviour, the vast majority involved male judges with 6 being senior judges (4 judges, including 1 High Court judge, and 2 coroners).*
In the calendar year of 2025, 7 of 17 similar upheld complaints involved female judges with not a single upheld complaint of bullying and/or harassment against a senior male judge.*
This misconduct was mostly punished with formal advice. In three instances, judges sanctioned previously for misconduct received a warning. In 2024 a High Court judge who abused his position trying to have a romantic relationship with an unwilling junior female staff member received a reprimand.
So far, in the calendar year of 2026 (January and February) three complaints have been upheld relating to what could be described as bullying and/or harassing behaviour. One magistrate was issued formal advice for misconduct for shouting at a member of staff (JCIO Statement 8425), another for making gestures, whispering to the chairperson and shouting at a complainant causing them to feel humiliated and tearful (JCIO Statement 6425). An employment judge was also given formal advice for raising his voice on several occasions and interrupting a complainant during cross-examination which created a hostile environment for the complainant (JCIO Statement 6325). All three judges were male but only in one case do we know for certain that the complainant was female.
The data indicate that women barristers’ experiences of bullying are not being reported or, if they are, they are not finding their way through the system.
Harman proposed that the judiciary use a tool like ‘Talk to Spot’ for anonymous reporting, install court monitoring, remove the time limit and obtain audio recordings for all professional court users (review recommendations 30-35).
She also recommended that sanction decisions include an independent person to tackle the perception of judges marking their own homework.
Responding to the review, the Lady Chief Justice said that the judiciary would review routes to complain and also work to challenge unacceptable behaviour:
‘… While the majority of judges behave professionally and courteously, Baroness Harman’s review refers to too many examples of judicial bullying. Such behaviour is unacceptable and should have no place in our justice system...
We need to give those who experience bullying, harassment or discrimination the confidence to speak up knowing that something will be done and that their own career will not suffer.’
The JCIO process is not fit for purpose if female barristers won’t use it to report bullying, harassment or discrimination. Despite the courts in England and Wales having vast experience in supporting complainants who report all kinds of abuse, they have yet to put their own house in order.
Harman’s recommendations echo tools we know support complainants: using technology for recording and transcribing hearings, anonymity for complainants, no time limit and collection of independent complaints that support each other. These tools, including ‘Talk to Spot’, are within reach.
I would add that if the JCIO recorded gender, ethnicity or disability of complainants this would help monitor trends. The sooner the JCIO sets up these tools, the sooner we will shift the jeopardy onto those responsible for unacceptable behaviour. After all, good judges have nothing to fear from a complaints system that actively supports complainants.
2024: Female judges’ behaviour included critical remarks, rudely interrupting or speaking in an inappropriate tone.
2024: Male judges’ behaviour included inappropriate language, aggressive behaviour, being over-familiar, racial harassment, shouting, discourteous and disrespectful behaviour, sending a romantic letter to a junior member of staff and attempting to have a relationship, sarcasm, interruption, rudeness, irritation and contempt.
2025: Female judges’ behaviour included insensitive remarks, inappropriate language and desk banging, raising their voice and shouting, rude dismissive and unprofessional comments, lacking respect and undermining professionals.
2025: Male judges’ behaviour included wrongly referring to a sexual abuse case, being rude, combative and aggressive, ranting at staff and interrupting a court session, speaking to staff in a stern, belittling and intimidating manner, being discourteous, expressing homophobic views, being dismissive and unprofessional, making inappropriate comments and a sexist remark, being aggressive and referring to a female colleague as a ‘trolley dolly’ and undermining her.
Statement of Expected Behaviour, January 2023
The Judicial Guide to Conduct, revised July 2023
The Judicial Discipline (Prescribed Procedures) Regulations 2023
The Judicial Conduct Rules 2023
The Judicial Conduct (Magistrates) Rules 2023
Independent review of bullying, harassment and discrimination at the Bar of England and Wales, Baroness Harriet Harman, September 2025
Barristers’ Working Lives Report 2023, Bar Council 2024
Letter from Simon Parsons, Head of Operations, JCIO to Baroness Harriet Harman KC, 13 May 2025
Lady Chief Justice’s response to the Harman Review, 8 September 2025
Is the Judicial Conduct Investigations Office process fit for purpose? Women barristers’ experiences of bullying are not being reported or, if they are, they are not making it through the system, says Tana Adkin KC
Chair of the Bar reports back
Marie Law, Director of Toxicology at AlphaBiolabs
Get ready to lead in a rapidly evolving digital landscape
A £500 donation from AlphaBiolabs has been made to the leading UK charity tackling international parental child abduction and the movement of children across international borders
Marie Law, Director of Toxicology at AlphaBiolabs, outlines the drug and alcohol testing options available for family law professionals, and how a new, free guide can help identify the most appropriate testing method for each specific case
By Louise Crush of Westgate Wealth Management
There is no typical day in the life as a Supreme Court judicial assistant, says Josephine Gillingwater, and that’s what makes the role so enjoyably diverse
With at least 31 reports of AI hallucinations in UK legal cases – over 800 worldwide – and judges using AI to assist in judicial decision-making, the risks and benefits are impossible to ignore. Matthew Lee examines how different jurisdictions are responding
What has changed, and why? Paul Secher unpacks the new standards aligning the recruiting, training and appraising of judges – the first major change to the system for ten years
The deprivation of liberty is the most significant power the state can exercise. Drawing on frontline experience, Chris Henley KC explains why replacing trial by jury with judge-only trials risks undermining justice
Baffled by the government’s proposed s 41 reforms and by the Law Commission’s preferred model, Laura Hoyano looks at what won’t work, and what will
