FREE LEGAL AID IN KAZAKHSTAN
186
activities in support of human rights and the provision of professional legal aid. The difference between NGOs
and Bar Associations is that most NGOs represent certain social groups, or even civil society as a whole. On
the other hand the main mission of a lawyer, especially professional defense lawyers working on criminal
and administrative cases, is to represent private interests, primarily the protection of the rights, freedom and
legitimate interests of particular persons. By having the public function of ensuring the protection of the
constitutional rights of citizens, Bar Associations guard the rights of the person, and thereby have the major
function of protecting the institutions of civil society from arbitrariness and illegal compulsion on the part of
state structures, in that society consists of citizens, and the force and influence of society depend on the level
of freedom, independence and security of every person.
Under these circumstances NGOs and professional associations of lawyers cannot be equated, since the
functions, objectives, instruments and responsibilities of these two institutions are essentially different.
It is, moreover, impossible to equate NGOs and Bar Associations in terms of their authority to protect the
rights of citizens, since Bar Associations are specialized institutions established for a specific purpose, and as
professional associations of lawyers are adapted to doing specific work.
The other salient problem that may arise if the provision of legal aid at the expense of the state budget is
transferred from Bar Associations to NGOs or other structures is staffing. A lawyer (attorney) is a graduate of
law, who has done an internship with a Bar Association and passed a difficult examination in order to obtain
a license. The lawyer complies with a code of ethics and the requirements of the Bar Association charter, and
being under its aegis can be disciplined for transgressing rules or violating the code of ethics.
Basically, the given requirements of a lawyer are such as to guarantee a level of skill necessary to provide
high-quality protection in a criminal trial. NGOs will not be able to provide the same or another comparable
system of staffing, professional development and individual appraisal. Moreover unlike Bar Associations with
their special legal status and additional guarantees of professional independence
9
, NGOs are not protected
from negative influences and abuse on the part of law enforcement bodies or other interested parties.
The work of a lawyer is generally to do with taking part in legal conflicts, including with bodies of criminal
investigation that pursue narrow departmental ends and have the potential to put pressure on their opponents.
Under these circumstances the support of a Bar Association is a sure guarantee to professional lawyers of normal
work. NGOs, on the other hand, have neither legal nor organizational resources. So without denying wholesale
the possibility of NGO involvement in the provision of legal aid to the population through consultation, we
should be exercise vigilance when it comes to them being involved in criminal or administrative proceedings.
The idea of creating ‘state’ bar associations has been discussed of late. It is envisaged that these will be set up
under the judicial authorities or local executive bodies, and consist of several lawyers paid for from the state
budget. These state bar associations are seen as creating an alternative to existing Bar Associations, and being
charged with providing legal aid to those in lower income groups. Those envisaging such associations describe
them as legal bureaus or ‘municipal’ bar associations.
We find such a recommendation unacceptable. In criminal proceedings the prosecution and the laying of
charges are done by representatives of the state that relate in fact to the executive. Roughly the same state
9
For example LoLP as well as art 365 of CC set up a wide range of such guarantees
Chapter I
187
of affairs applies in the case of administrative cases. If ‘legal bureaus’ were to be created under the authority
of the courts or local administrations, they would also be related to the executive branch, with all the
consequences that would ensue. A priori they could not enjoy or guarantee the same degree of legal freedom
and investigatory independence that is typical of Bar Associations because of their special, independent, non-
governmental status. Besides, regular cooperation between legal bureau employees and bodies of preliminary
investigation would inevitably create new conditions for corrupt practices, and would worsen the quality of
the legal aid being provided.
Protection of the rights and legitimate interests of citizens should be carried out by independent lawyers, with
the required level of freedom provided by a self-financed, professional community
10
.
Article 5.13 of the Document of the Copenhagen Meeting of the Conference of the Human Dimension of
the CSCE (Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe, precursor of the OSCE), 1990, states that ‘the
independence of legal practitioners will be recognized and protected, in particular as regards conditions for
recruitment and practice’
11
. The Bar Association is a union of professionals with ethics, corporate interests
and rules of behavior, and in some specialist literature it is defined as an independent civil society institution,
standing apart from the state. There is a deep sense in this: lawyers are quite often the final authorities
defending the citizen from arbitrariness on the part of repressive bodies. It is indisputable that lawyers should
have no official relations with state machinery. Subordination of lawyers to executive power puts an end to
their independence, and as a result puts an end to the effective protection of citizens’ rights and freedom
12
.
Article 16 of the Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers, adopted by the 8
th
United Nations Congress on the
Prevention of Crime and Treatment of Offenders, 1990, provides such guarantees for lawyers’ activities as
being able to discharge duties without intimidation, obstacles, disturbances or inappropriate interventions
13
.
We believe that establishing state legal bureaus would be an example of such inappropriate interventions.
We can say that currently the majority of those being investigated for prosecution are eligible for the services
of an assigned lawyer, so it is quite possible to envisage a scenario in which the bulk of cases would be
handled by ‘state advocates’, resulting in a huge overload of work for employees of the institution concerned,
and a corresponding burgeoning of budget expenses in this field.
Efforts to decrease financial costs by having a property qualification for persons eligible for legal aid at
the expense of the state are unjustifiable, for the following reasons. Provision of appropriate legal aid for
defendants in criminal and administrative cases is in every case an obligation of the state, regardless of the
material circumstances of the person concerned. This is a principle, the essence of which is that a criminal
prosecution by the state puts the citizen concerned in an unfavorable situation a priori, since once he or she
is in the realm of legal proceedings he or she has to oppose the entire machinery of state prosecution alone,
with no conception of the rules and order this machinery operates by.
To avoid an outrage being committed by the state, the law provides the defendant in such cases with a
defense lawyer who uses his or her knowledge and skills and a sufficient range of powers to defend the
10
Galoganov A. The Bar in Russia: history and present days, 2003
11
OSCE, Human Dimention, ODIHR 2006
12
Stetsovskiy U. Moscow, 2007
13
Main conditions on lawyers’ role. Semenayko E, 2005
Достарыңызбен бөлісу: |