Law Society to meet over chief's character reference for sex offender

A special meeting is to be held by the Law Society into the issues surrounding the character reference provided by its chief executive for a cousin convicted of serious sexual offences.

The meeting was triggered after 50 letters from members called for a Special General Meeting (SGM). It is understood they want to debate and vote on a range of motions, including calling for the resignation of chief executive David Lavery.

Lavery has apologised for providing a character reference to a court after the conviction of former schoolteacher William Lloyd-Lavery.

Last week Lavery was sacked from his role as a human rights commissioner.

It is understood the solicitors who called for the special meeting say they want to know how the decision was made to keep him in post as chief executive of the Law Society, and on what basis.

It is expected that the SGM will be called within the next four weeks.

In a statement last week, Lavery apologised for a "serious error in judgement on my part in providing a character reference for my cousin and particularly for any hurt and distress that I caused the victims in this case".

"I profoundly regret that and I am committed to doing all I can to address it in the time ahead," he said.

Last week the Law Society said it had "undertaken an internal process" but would be making no further comment due to the "confidential nature of that process".

Solicitor Jonathan McKeown of JMK Solicitors, one of those who called for the meeting, said an independent investigation would re-establish trust in the Law Society, adding that he would support the outcome.

"The wider membership and the public now doubt the adequacy of what happened in relation into the investigation into Mr Lavery," McKeown told the BBC's Good Morning Ulster programme.

He said the Law Society had not been transparent enough about its investigation.

"The things that make the Law Society actually quite a good regulator is their ability to keep things in house and to keep them secret because they're dealing with sensitive information.

"The problem with this is this particular issue strays into their public functions and whether or not the public can have confidence and if the membership don't even know how the society came up with the decision, the membership can't reassure the public either."

He added that the Law Society had put themselves in a position where it looked like they wanted to protect the process and their own reputation by not engaging quickly enough with the victims.

He added: "The issue for me is not what happened at the time. [Lavery] could have come out and publicly apologised, publicly reinstated the position and publicly ensured that he had regained the trust.

"I would be fully supportive of that."

McKeown said he was concerned that the issue had "spiralled away" from Lavery and become about the actions of the senior management team and the executive.

"The problem here is that people did not see the contrition from Mr Lavery... and now they're not seeing the contrition from the society."