Recent Bar Standards Board Tribunal underlines the intense scrutiny placed on all firearms certificate holders

Lord Keen of Elie QC recently rose to our attention in a professional capacity as the barrister acting on behalf of the Advocate General for Scotland in the landmark constitutional case which challenged the Boris Johnson’s decision to prorogue Parliament.  

This week however Lord Keen hit the headlines for very different reasons. He stood accused before the Bar Standards Board (“BSB”) of undermining the public’s trust and confidence in the legal profession, which, if upheld would amount to a breach of the Bar’s code of ethics. This matter arose following Lord Keen’s conviction for breaching a condition subject to which his shotgun certificate was issued in failing to store the weapon securely.

With the exception of minor motoring and traffic offences, typically, any criminal conviction triggers an obligation on barristers to report to their regulatory body. This is an obligation which extends equally from the most junior barristers, including training “pupil” barristers through to Queen’s Counsel (the highest honour in the profession) and pursuant to this requirement Lord Keen self-reported the conviction in this instance.

The facts of the original case were that Lord Keen left a shotgun in the basement of his property prior to going on holiday. The gun would usually be kept in a secure gun cabinet, in accordance with the Home Office Guidance on Firearms. However, on this occasion Lord Keen admitted that having returned from a shooting trip and intending to clear the gun before locking it away, he simply forgot to do so. He then went away on holiday leaving the weapon unlocked and, whilst away, Lord Keen’s premises were subject to a break in. The Police to attended the property and discovered the gun, along with some cartridges. Whilst the gun may arguably have been secure to an extent, being within a secure property, the fact that it was not in its respective cabinet was considered to be a breach of his shotgun certificate sufficiently serious to warrant prosecution.  

The overarching security condition subject to which all Shotgun Certificates are issued are clear providing that “any shotgun must at all times be stored securely so as to prevent, as far as is reasonably practicable, access to the shotguns by an unauthorised person”.  This is of course not an absolute duty because what is and what is not practicable will differ from circumstance to circumstance. Whilst the Home Office Guidance talks in terms of gun cabinets, and so perhaps creates the impression in the mind of police and certificate holders that a cabinet is the only lawful method of securing a gun, this is not the case. The law allows a degree of flexibility to cater for a range of circumstances. For example, a person holding a small number of shotguns might have taken reasonable steps were they to break down the guns and store them in such a way as to prevent access to all three parts. Equally the use of clamps and trigger locks could be appropriate.  

In view of this Lord Keen’s conviction could be considered harsh. He was, after all, the victim of a burglary and the facts as they are set out suggest that it was a case which could, and probably should, have been disposed of by way of a warning letter or perhaps a caution.  Perhaps though the decision to prosecute this case is illustrative of a wider political attitude towards firearms ownership more generally.

Whatever the case, Lord Keen’s consequent appearance before the BSB should serve as a warning shot to all certificate holders. The potential for reputational damage arising from offences related to firearms or decisions taken by police firearms licensing team is clear. Many certificate holders are in our experience professionally qualified individuals and this case serves to highlight the additional dimension of oversight by a regulatory body.  Lord Keen was ultimately cleared of misconduct by the BSB. The tribunal weighed the singularity and anomalous nature of the offence against the potential danger to public safety caused by the lapse when coming to their decision.

All professionals with shotgun and firearms certificates need to take extra care in their dealings with firearms and particularly where security is concerned. Certificate holders must now be acutely aware of the potential of wider ramifications – either from their employer or regulatory body. A minor conviction for a breach of condition offence is one thing but to face additional and intense scrutiny from professional bodies can often be more damaging and undesirable.

For completeness sake Lord Keen commented: ‘I was disappointed the BSB brought this complaint. I was very disappointed by the very lengthy period of time it took to deal with the complaint. I’m obviously relieved the complaint has been rejected and dismissed.’