ATM fraud and rules of conduct for barristers

From The Register:

This tells us the tale of a flaw in the security of ATMs and the cards we use in them, and the activities of Alistair Kelman, a barrister who took on a case about phantom withdrawals in the early 1990s. The article says that he kept quiet about the way the withdrawals were being done - an inside job at a particular High Street bank - for fear it would be leaked to the press.

Isn't he, a barrister, an officer of the court, bound by the Bar's Code of Conduct?

In particular:

(23#Pa raLink0

---- Applicable to all barristers

301 A barrister must have regard to paragraph 104 and must not:

(a) engage in conduct whether in pursuit of his profession or otherwise which is:

(i) dishonest or otherwise discreditable to a barrister;

(ii) prejudicial to the administration of justice; or

(iii) likely to diminish public confidence in the legal profession or the administration of justice or otherwise bring the legal profession into disrepute;

(b) engage directly or indirectly in any occupation if his association with that occupation may adversely affect the reputation of the Bar or in the case of a practising barrister prejudice his ability to attend properly to his practice.

----

Didn't he violate this code by just sitting on the matter? Shouldn't he have gone discreetly to a suitable authority? And what of the fact that he was helping to conceal a crime? The programmers at the bank had been stealing large sums of money, and he knew about it, and did nothing about it.

How does this bode for the future of Chip & Pin? Seems to me that the banks don't have a security system protecting our money from thieves, so much as a legal system protecting them from us.