Introduction
Lawyers or attorneys have one of the most important, challenging and at some point complicated responsibilities among the many other professions that we have today. There are many different kind of lawyers, but the most prominent and probably with the most challenging role are the criminal lawyers. Because of the responsibilities that lawyers have once they have committed themselves to their clients, there are times that their morality is put to test.
The Criminal Lawyers’ Duties to their Clients
“A lawyer has to be with a client loyal, knowledgeable, skillful, and industrious. A lawyer shall use all suitable means to protect and advance the client’s legitimate rights, claims, and objectives. A lawyer shall not be frightened by a real or imagined fear of judicial disfavor or public unpopularity, nor be influenced by mere self-interest” (“Lawyers Duties to Clients”, 2008)
The above statement summarized the lawyers’ duties to every client who may seek for their services. This can be perceived as easy in a way that people may of course seek the lawyers’ assistance in cases wherein they need to prosecute somebody who may have done their harm or if the client feels that his/her right has been breached and he/she wants to fight for it. This is exactly what lawyers are trained for. They are to protect and help uphold the rights of every individual. They have dedicated themselves into ensuring that their client’s intentions will be served rightfully.
But this very duty of the lawyers is said to be tough in some instances wherein they have to defend their clients, especially when the case is a much publicized one and many proofs have been pointed out against the client even before any court trial proceedings.
If I am a lawyer, what will I do if I personally think that my client is guilty beyond reasonable doubt? Will I continue to defend him/her? What if my morality will be at stake?
First, we need to think about the real meaning of morality? According to Cohen (1985) being moral is being truthful and at the same time defending what you believe is right and true. Being a morally good person is also achieved by serving others what you think is best for them. And lastly, being a morally good person means being able to keep what you have committed upon. This means that once a lawyer has agreed to somebody that he will defend him, that agreement will be binding and the lawyer should be loyal to the said client. He will not act as a ‘traitor’ by breaching the trust given to him by the client.
With Cohen’s article, it can be clearly inferred that lawyers can indeed maintain their morals by keeping with their words and ensuring that the interest of their client, however bad or negative they are perceived by the people, are served justifiably.
Secondly, we need to analyze if the client can indeed seek for a lawyer’s assistance to defend himself (even though he believed to have committed a crime)? It is stated in the basic principles of lawyers that “all persons are entitled to call upon the assistance of a lawyer of their choice to protect and establish their rights and to defend them in all stages of criminal proceedings” (Office of the Human Commissioner for Human Rights, 2002). This means that anyone and no one in particular can ask any lawyer to defend him as long as he believes that the lawyer can best serve his interest as a client.
Also, there are instances wherein the client or the defender doesn’t have the financial resources to support his needs in paying for the lawyer’s services. In this instance, the government itself will be providing a lawyer who can justifiably defend the client. It is stated in the basic principles of lawyers that:
“Governments shall ensure the provision of sufficient funding and other resources for legal services to the poor and, as necessary, to other disadvantaged persons. Professional associations of lawyers shall cooperate in the organization and provision of services, facilities and other resources” (Office of the Human Commissioner for Human Rights, 2002)
Even those who are already in jail can avail of the lawyer’s services thru the government’s assistance because it is imparted in every lawyer’s basic principle that’
“All arrested, detained or imprisoned persons shall be provided with adequate opportunities, time and facilities to be visited by and to communicate and consult with a lawyer, without delay, interception or censorship and in full confidentiality. Such consultations may be within sight, but not within the hearing, of law enforcement officials” (Office of the Human Commissioner for Human Rights, 2002)
It is also worth noting that every lawyer’s basic premise is that anybody is innocent until proven guilty. Hence, even if there are a number of proofs that will point out against the client, he can still be considered innocent unless the verdict against him is given by the judge of the court. The lawyer will have to find ways and present claims or evidences that will prove that the client is not guilty after all. Or if he the lawyer thinks that a guilty verdict will be imposed. It will then be his responsibility to somehow prevent his client for getting a very serious punishment. This is due to the fact that parts of the duties of the lawyers to their clients are (Wasserman, 1988):
- It is the lawyer’s duty to any client the he/she does not prevent against the coexisting obligation to treat with consideration all persons involved in the legal process and to avoid the punishment of harm on the appellate process, the courts, and the law itself.
- Lawyers should not become emotionally attached to each client s this will negative affect or impair sound judgment over the case.
- Lawyers should always ensure that the best interest of the client will be served and that the clients’ lawful objectives, while mindful of their concurrent duties to the legal system and the public good are maintained.
- It also a big duty of the lawyers to provide his clients with all the information, however negative it may sound such as the varied potential results, possible charges, schedules, and the accessibility of alternative dispute decision. This would also mean that the lawyer will not allow his client to have unrealistic
Conclusion
Thus, from this list of basic principles alone coupled with the articles presented by Cohen and Wasserman, it can be perceived that lawyers especially the defense attorneys must and should always defend the clients whatever the circumstances are, even if it means putting their morality at stake. And It is the defense attorney’s responsibility to defend the client who has asked for his services. This is what the lawyers are trained for. And this is what they have sworn right after they passed the bar exams. At any rate, moral issues are very vague concept and as defense lawyers, they have the very reasons to show that their morals are kept within perspective while serving their clients.
References:
Cohen, Elliot D. 1985. “Pure Legal Advocates and Moral Agents: Two Concepts of A lawyer in an Adversary System.” Criminal Justice Ethics : 38-59.
“Lawyers Duties to Clients.” 2008. Allatorneysweb.com. [online]. Web.
Office of the Human Commissioner for Human Rights. 2002. “Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers” [online]. Web.
Wasserman, Steven. 1988. “The Philosopher as Public Defender: In Defense of a Rapist”. International Journal of Applied Philosophy, Vol. 4, No. 1.