Many solicitors and barristers work from a sense of conviction rather than for profit, writes Mary Carolan
SOLICITORS AND barristers working in the publicly funded areas of family law, criminal law and asylum and immigration law are dealing daily with issues impinging on the rights, freedom and quality of life of many, particularly the most vulnerable and marginalised.
Lawyers, often on a pro bono(public good) basis, are also bringing a growing number of judicial review challenges to disputed decisions by public authorities. The explosion in the numbers of asylum- and immigration-related judicial review cases is set to continue.
Those involved in judicial review work reject suggestions it is a "gravy train" for lawyers, and insist it is an essential part of democracy in that it clarifies the law and rights, sometimes with far-reaching benefits.
Lawyers working on immigration issues say failure to process asylum applications and appeals fairly and properly is the main reason for the thousands of judicial review challenges being brought.
Senior counsel Michael O'Higgins points out that a judicial review cannot be brought without leave from a High Court judge, meaning there is an inbuilt filter to weed out frivolous cases. A large majority of judicial review cases are brought by litigants who don't have enough funds and there is a strong tradition in the Bar of taking such cases on a pro bono basis, he said.
Michael Farrell, of community law organisation Flac, said its centres have never been busier, with 5,250 callers in 2007, and he believes this is a reflection of a more regulated society and greater awareness of rights.
One third of callers wanted advice on family cases, while employment, housing and property issues were the other dominant concerns.
Flac provides advice and sometimes takes legal cases, but generally only if they affect a group rather than an individual. The recent case of Lydia Foy, highlighting lack of recognition of rights of transgendered persons, is an example. Flac believes the legal profession, especially big law firms, should make a greater commitment to public interest law. Ireland should have a scheme like that in the US, where large firms allocate a department to pro bono work, Farrell said.
Solicitor Catherine Ghent is concerned the "increasingly commercial focus" in the professional education of lawyers "provides less opportunity and less incentive for incoming lawyers to realise their potential to effect change and contribute to the development of society".
"We take for granted many rights which only received recognition and protection through litigation," she said.
Pól Ó Murchú, a campaigning solicitor for those on the margins, including troubled children and young people with special educational needs, regards the law as "a strong arm of our democracy" but believes lawyers are failing to deal adequately with injustices in society.
As society becomes increasingly multicultural, these issues will attain greater importance and lawyers will have to adapt and ensure that justice is done.
Collaborative law and mediation may provide a better means of addressing inequalities, Ó Murchú believes, advocating establishment of a network of adequately resourced community law centres.
"From the judiciary down, we have a duty to vindicate rights but don't do enough in that regard," he said.
"We need to foster and encourage a sense of vocation amongst lawyers."