David Lavery

Two SGMs were requisitioned following controversy that surrounded Mr Lavery’s provision of a character reference to his cousin William Lloyd-Lavery, who was convicted in April of historical sex offences committed against female pupils at schools where he was employed as a teacher between 1975 and 1979. In the reference Mr Lavery described Mr Lloyd Lavery as a Christian man and “a person of sound judgement and good character”.

The provision of that reference subsequently lost Mr Lavery his post as human rights commissioner following an independent investigation, pursuant to the Code of Governance of the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission, into its provision.

Mr Lavery apologised and admitted to a “serious error of judgement”. The Law Society opened its own internal process, but at the time of Mr Lavery’s removal from NIHRC was offering no further comment.

It has since emerged that the Law Society opened a disciplinary investigation into Mr Lavery and that he was found guilty of gross misconduct, but that a sanction short of dismissal was recommended.

Mr Lavery had sought an injunction preventing disclosure of this information to members which led to the postponement of the original SGM due to take place on the 9 September. It, along with a second SGM requisitioned on 8 September, took place yesterday evening.

The first motion before the SGM called on Mr Lavery to resign and failing such resignation for the Council to take “all necessary steps to terminate his appointment without further delay”. It passed with the support of more than 90 per cent of members present.

The second and third motions expressing “no confidence in the Executive Committee, Council and senior leadership of the Society in respect of their handling of issues arising from Mr Lavery’s provision of a character reference” and “that the members of the Society express no confidence in Council’s handling of this matter” also passed with significant support.

Members, however, stopped short of passing a motion, before the second SGM, expressing no confidence in the President of the Law Society, Mark Borland.

Mr Borland informed members last week, however, that any resolutions passed at the SGM were “merely advisory” prompting Mr Gervase Genity, of Granite Legal Services to comment that serious questions arise as to what purpose the SGM process is intended to serve if it cannot be used as a “a meaningful mechanism of accountability”.