The Association of Muslim Lawyers (AML) and the Society of Black Lawyers have obtained fi gures that show that the Law Society’s regulatory arm is more than twice as likely to investigate misconduct allegations against ethnic minority solicitors than it is against white lawyers.

They claim that the disproportionate attention is fuelled by discrimination, rather than by suspect practices. Figures published by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) in 2006 showed that 62 per cent of investigations related to non-white lawyers.

The black and Muslim groups are looking into whether they can break away from supervision by the Law Society. From next year the Law Society will no longer be able to compel particular interest groups to sign up to it as their representative body.

Peter Herbert, the chairman of the Society of Black Lawyers, said: “These fi gures are a prima facie case of racial discrimation. Clearly this form of regulation is not working and we are looking at establishing a separate, independent watchdog for ethnic minorities.”

Mahmud al-Rashid, a spokesman for the AML, said: “The fi gures show there must be discrimination at the SRA. We are demanding an immediate investigation.”

But a spokesman for the SRA said that it was the statutory regulatory body for all solicitors and it was not possible for those holding themselves out as solicitors to be regulated by anyone else.

The SRA said that the fi gures in question were published last year and seemed large because the they were part of a wider category that included those of mixed race or “other”.

The SRA added that black and ethnic minority solicitors tend to be disproportionately concentrated in the small or sole-practitioner fi rms, and these historically were the ones that tended to be more likely than larger fi rms to get into trouble.

The row was ignited when a leading ethnic minority law fi rm asked the SRA to investigate a white employee who was alleged to have committed fraud and made racist comments about Iranians. The SRA began examining the incidents and eventually concluded that the woman had made racist remarks. But then to the surprise of her bosses, it dropped the case on the basis that she was pregnant.

By contrast, an Asian lawyer from the same fi rm had to undergo a monthlong investigation when he was falsely accused of overcharging a client £18. The fi rm spent £14,000 defending its employee.

The SRA had been asked by MP Keith Vaz to provide fi gures on its investigations into black and Asian solicitors and found that in 2006, 62 per cent of investigations were launched against non-white, mixed and “other” lawyers, a group which represents just 22 per cent of the total population of solicitors