Dear Editor,
I am impressed by the scope and sweep of the letter from Mr Christopher Ram titled, ‘The lawyers have put their profession in cold storage’ (SN May 31). Yes, that profession (it is not the only one) is in the throes of an expanding Ice Age, and Mr Ram has dared to direct a piercing light on the calumnies and not-so-secret behaviours (including likely felonies) of some of its members in this country. I commend him.
Far too often, I have had to listen to the anguished complaints of the poor, the unlearned, and the vulnerable of their being misled, or exploited, by those who took an oath to uphold the integrity and majesty of the law. It has long been known, and becomes increasingly more public, that there are many in the local legal arena that neither adhere to, nor even recognize, a professional canon of ethics, or are guided by a personal one.
The refrain is lengthy: insisting on the merits of a matter when there is none; collecting fees and not representing; representing and not doing so effectively or competently; overcharging and gouging the helpless; collecting court awards and not disclosing the full amount to plaintiffs, and so on and so forth.
Some of the individuals who are known in the closed brethren as breakers of the law are among those who, at one time or another, were makers of the law. Also, Mr Ram noted that senior members of the bar accepted high awards. I was troubled to learn that some of those who were conferred with awards, were among those who were part of the reviewing and other related processes. This is jarring to say the least. The formality and actuality of (if such occurred) of recusal provide scant comfort. In fact, further insult is added, as I would view such as a studied exercise in the meaningless, if not hypocritical.
A few years ago, I wrote that if 90% of the lawyers in this country were practising in another society, there was the high probability that 90% of them would either be in jail or disbarred. I recall that Mr Ram was a shade disbelieving. In view of his May 31 writing, I believe that he has come around a little closer to my own numbers and position.
Further, supposedly decent and honourable fellow practitioners have either turned a blind eye, or covered up, or distanced themselves from one egregious failing after another. Silence reigns supreme; the sometimes powerful in court are mainly pusillanimous and protective outside of it.
Separately, and just as unfortunately, the travails and malignancies of the legal profession are not limited to it only. The same have been heard repeatedly for medicine, finance, insurance, and the media, to identify a few.
Finally, I agree with oversight councils and fanged watchdogs. But those dogs are only as good as the ethical nourishment consumed, the character muscles developed, and the personal ideals embraced. There has always been pontificating, and rightly so, about training the trainers, and policing the police. Well, it is time that such talk is meaningfully extended to lassoing the lawless, judging the judgers, and jailing the jailers.
Yours faithfully,
GHK Lall