• New whistleblowing guidance for in-house lawyers
    By Law Gazette reporter28 October 2025

    The Law Society has included draft whistleblowing guidance in the second version of its evolving ethical practice framework for in-house solicitors.

    Developed by Protect, the whistleblowing charity, the guidance sets out key points for in-house lawyers to think about before raising public interest concerns. These include considering whether reporting alleged wrongdoing would breach legal professional privilege, and situations when a solicitor comes under a duty to blow the whistle.

    Categories of wrongdoing or malpractice covered include miscarriages of justice, damage to the environment, health and safety breaches, and criminal offences.

    Chancery Lane has been working with the Inter-Disciplinary Ethics Applied Centre at the University of Leeds to develop the new ethics framework for the 34,500-plus in-house solicitors in England and Wales. The project is part of a three-year programme that has become increasingly urgent amid the fallout from the Post Office Horizon IT Inquiry.

    Whistleblowing was identified as a ‘key priority’ for in-house solicitors. The ethics framework’s second iteration also includes a whistleblowing policy model template.

    Society president Mark Evans said: ‘I’d like to thank all members who helped us introduce several enhancements in the [framework’s] second iteration. Whistleblowing is a key plank in a resilient ethical organisational culture. However in-house solicitors’ duty to whistleblow could come into conflict with client confidentiality, making it difficult to know whether to report wrongdoing.’

    The project has become increasingly urgent amid the fallout from the Post Office Horizon IT Inquiry


    Study reveals generational difference in whistleblowing
    Whistleblowing charity sees rise in callers to legal advice helpline
    Dr Jim Baxter, professional ethics consultancy team leader at the IDEA Centre, said: ‘Whistleblowers can find themselves facing unemployment, legal costs or ostracism from colleagues who see them as disloyal. In-house solicitors can feel stuck between a rock and a hard place: as well as all the difficulties any whistleblower faces, they may also risk breaching a professional duty of client confidentiality.

    ‘The first version of our framework contained some provisions designed to make things easier; in this second version, we’ve partnered with Protect to approach whistleblowing head-on. Whistleblowing for in-house solicitors is never going to be easy or simple, but we hope these resources will go some way to support those who want to serve the public interest by standing up against wrongdoing.’

    Other enhancements in the second version of the ethics framework include face-to-face training materials enabling practitioners to use interactive scenarios in team workshops; and guidance on how to position the framework with employers, ‘helping solicitors make the case for an empowered legal function’.

    The new guidance has been put out for consultation until 26 January.

  • Statement of Parental Alienation Study Group & Global Action for Research Integrity in Parental Alienation / Declaración del Grupo de Estudio de la Alienación Parental y el Movimiento Global de Integridad Científica en Alienación Parental
    By Alejandro Mendoza-Amaro and William Bernet
    visibility
    63 Views

    description
    18 Pages

    link
    2 Files ▾
    2023, Statement of Parental Alienation Study Group & Global Action for Research Integrity in Parental Alienation / Declaración del Grupo de Estudio de la Alienación Parental y el Movimiento Global de Integridad Científica en Alienación Parental

    sell
    Human Rights Law,
    Human Rights,
    International Human Rights Law,
    Derechos Humanos,
    Research Integrity

    CONCLUSIONS: The recurring identification of scientific fraud in the field of study of parental alienation makes it clear that it is not a theoretical disagreement or opinions between authors, but a serious problem of research malpractice that has escalated to the degree of denialism of the science, which has compromised the institutional actions of national and international organizations, as in the case of the Report of the United Nations Special Rapporteur on Violence Against Women. RECOMMENDATIONS: It is necessary for the United Nations to initiate an internal review process in the area of research integrity and parental alienation so that it dismisses documents with problems of scientific fraud in the field of parental alienation and issues an institutional position that includes recommendations to correct the problems derived from the scientific fraud. In the same way, international, national and local associations that address the issue of parental alienation and research integrity. CONCLUSIONES: La identificación recurrente de fraude científico en el campo de estudio de la alienación parental, deja claro que no se trata de un desacuerdo teórico o de opiniones entre autores, sino de un grave problema de malas prácticas científicas que ha escalado al grado de negacionismo de la ciencia, que ha comprometido el actuar institucional de organismos nacionales e internacionales, como el caso del Informe de la Relatora Especial de Violencia Contra las Mujeres de Naciones Unidas. RECOMENDACIONES: Es necesario que Naciones Unidas inicie un proceso de revisión interno en materia de integridad científica y alienación parental para que desestime los documentos con problemas de fraude científico en el campo de la alienación parental y emita un posicionamiento institucional que incluya recomendaciones para subsanar los problemas derivados del fraude científico. De la misma forma, las asociaciones internacionales, nacionales y locales que comprendan el tema de la alienación parental e integridad científica.

  • Welcome to WordPress! This is your first post. Edit or delete it to take the first step in your blogging journey.