The Bar Council of England and Wales has criticised delays in the bringing of sexual misconduct charges against leading criminal barrister Jo Sidhu KC and praised the three “aspiring barristers” who brought claims against him.

In a statement delivered yesterday in response to the Bar Tribunal and Adjudication Service’s finding on Monday that three out of 15 professional misconduct charges faced by Sidhu were proven, Bar Council chair Sam Townend also called on senior barristers to be vigilant in calling out misconduct.

Sidhu, a former chair of the Criminal Bar Association, had been accused of “predatory behaviour” and using his “pre-eminent position to manipulate vulnerable young women who were considering a career at the bar in order to gain sexual favours”, according to the opening statement delivered at the start of an eight-day hearing in November by Fiona Horlick KC, of Outer Temple Chambers, appearing for the Bar Standards Board (BSB).

The proven charges against Sidhu, who denied all 15 charges, related to his behaviour towards the second of the three complainants. According to one of the proven charges, reported by The Guardian, she was invited to “stay overnight in his hotel room and in his hotel bed, during a mini-pupillage or work-shadowing experience, such conduct being of a sexual nature, and which invitation he knew or ought to have known was inappropriate and/or unwanted”.

Townend singled out the complainants for praise, commenting: “We recognise how difficult it is to come forward to report sexual misconduct and it has taken great bravery for the complainants to make their reports and give evidence. It is incumbent on others, particularly senior barristers, who witness these behaviours to step up and report serious misconduct they have observed.”

The Bar Council chair said the two years it had taken from the initial complaints being made to the decision was “too long a time for everyone involved” and called on the BSB, which investigated the claim, to “focus their efforts on efficient and timely enforcement”. 

“The type of behaviour described by the tribunal is completely unacceptable at the Bar,” he added. “Even though the tribunal found some aspects did not constitute professional misconduct, they found the behaviours to be reprehensible.”

Monday’s verbal judgment in the closely watched case will be followed by a full written judgment and a sanctions hearing, which is expected January.

The tribunal made an interim order which prevents Sidhu from being issued with a practising certificate.

In a statement published in The Times, Sidhu’s solicitor, Nick Brett, of London firm Brett Wilson, said most of the case “has failed” and that his client will “consider whether to appeal against those limited findings on proper analysis of the judgment in due course”.

During the hearing Sidhu had argued the relationships with the women were consensual and related to his private life.

The Bar Council said the complainants initially raised their concerns with its confidential tool for recording incidents of harassment –  Talk to Spot – and has encouraged “anyone who experiences or witnesses discrimination, harassment, bullying, or any other forms of inappropriate behaviour, to report these incidents if they feel able to”.

In June, the Bar Council launched an independent review chaired by former Labour leader Harriet Harman KC, to investigate bullying and harassment at the Bar.