Man erased from Architects Register for inappropriate social media post


Peter Kellow of Peter Kellow Architecture has been erased from the Architects Register for inappropriate comments on social media where he denied the existence of the Jewish race

ARB alleged that Peter Kellow had written an inappropriate public post on his Facebook profile on 13 April 2019. In the post, Kellow denied the existence of the Jewish race and referred to Jews, Sunni Muslims and other groups as members of a ‘cult’ that should be subject to restrictions, banned from important public office, and subject to registration

The ARB argued that in doing so he had acted against Standards 1, 9 and 12 of the Architects Code.

Kellow attended the hearing but chose not to be legally represented.  In his written submissions, he stated the allegation concerned matters that fell outside of ARB’s remit, stating “the code concerns strictly professional conduct in the architect’s course of engagement on a specific job”.

He referred to the Professional Conduct Committee (PCC) as a “kangaroo court”.

PCC hearing

Peter Kellow was found guilty of unacceptable professional conduct (UPC) following a hearing of ARB’s independent Professional Conduct Committee (PCC) on 12 and 13 August 2020.

The PCC found the allegation proved under Standards 9 and 12, but concluded Standard 1 had not been breached.

Although the matter did not occur in the course of Kellow’s architectural practice, the PCC considered his conduct had the potential to cause offence and bring both himself and the profession into disrepute.

The PCC considered his comments represented a serious departure from the standard expected of an architect and amounted to unacceptable professional conduct.

When considering the sanction, the PCC noted Peter Kellow had no previous adverse regulatory findings and had removed the post from his Facebook profile.

However, the committee also acknowledged he had shown no remorse and insisted he stood by the views expressed in the post.

It considered Kellow lacked any meaningful insight into the impact of his comments and was mindful of the need for members of a profession to act fairly and without discrimination.

It concluded that his conduct was fundamentally incompatible with remaining on the register and that erasure was the proportionate sanction to impose.

As he is no longer registered with ARB, he cannot legally practise as an architect in the UK.

You can view the decision here.


  1. Depriving people of the right to freedom of thought is tantamount to psychological torture and political persecution. If the shoe was on the other foot people would be outraged and cry antisemitism. I hope he takes legal action against the organization and charge them with human rights violation. This case fits in the category of government protected minority group tyranny. A total disgrace that this happens with impunity in Western countries

  2. Lisette, I totally agree. The woke left which predominates in London-centric architectural circles is eating itself up on issues like this instead of putting Architecture itself at the centre of the table. As Jordan Peterson has said, if you want free speech and an open society you have to be prepared to be “offended”. And what is offence? In this matter its a false construct that shouldn’t exist. He makes valid points about societies within societies that leads to corruption of duty and decisions, which then require cover-ups. Topics that need discussing. But the lefts use of political correctness as a tool to stifle the willingness to discuss certain topics it has an interest in not being voiced, for political rather than real motives, is becoming so endemic and vicious its like a mental illness. This movement in our society is the path to the tyranny of lies that precedes the fall into the need to eliminate people, because in the end that’s the only way such things can be maintained.

  3. I don’t care if some people are offended, after all globalists and leftists feel entitled to offend everyone else with impunity, what I care about is whether what he said was true or not. All I see is people silencing him, destroying his career, putting hate labels on the guy, the usual bullying tactics, and what I don’t see is anyone refuting his claims.

    Why are people not challenging his claims instead of using their power to destroy his career?

  4. I’m sorry to disagree with the above comments, Peter Kellow said that all Adult jews should be forced to sign a register and that they should hold no public office, this isn’t about being “woke” which I am vehemently opposed to but blatant antisemitism.

    Would it be OK to say the same about any other religion or ethnic group.

    And in reply to Bing Bong Stevens i do utterly refute his claims!!

  5. @Michael Kaye, you disagree with the above comments, and I disagree with the hypocrisy and intellectual dishonesty displayed. The bias in your statement and use of the word antisemitism is very typical. Bolshevik communist turned that word into a psychological torture weapon to silence their critics and opposition. Jews abuse their privileges to call people, racist, Nazi and anti-semite every chance they get if they don’t like what you have to say. I speak from experience, some in New York went as far as calling me a piece of Sh*t simply because they didn’t like my opinion, they threaten and intimidate you with impunity. What is the difference between a Jewish person and a non-Jewish person? Why is one group of people placed above all other people walking the face of the earth? Why are those who say they are Jewish getting special legal protection beyond comprehension while they in more ways than one trample the rights of others? Please explain that double standard and apartheid in the supposedly civilized world to me. When I brought up this issue in another discussion and mentioned Oliver Cromwell the silence became deafening, so please be honest…..


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here