VIEWS ABOUT PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY AND CONDUCT OF LEGAL PROFESSION AMONG LITIGANTS AND LAWYERS: A SURVEY REPORT ASHISH

GOEL, 2070321
This Survey Report is a short analysis of the obligation of lawyers and litigants to comply with the ethical rules and principles encountered by the legal profession. This short analysis is based on the researchers understanding of the legal profession which was diligently used in conducting a survey on a total of five persons, two of which were practicing lawyers, and the remaining ones litigants in recent past in the State of West Bengal (See Annexure A & B). The outcome of the Survey Report, as we will see in the following segment, is amply clear: there is a tendency amongst lawyers and litigants to simply bring success to their respective court matters, with little or no adherence to ethical standards, unless explicitly prohibited under the statutory rules of the profession. It is shocking to note that both the lawyers lack a clear understanding of the words professional ethics. One of the lawyers even went on to state that lawyers do not have any ethics to follow at all, and that the word rules is often confused with ethics. Imperative here is to note that both the lawyers are well aware of their rights under the codified laws, but have little or no knowledge about their ethical obligations. This is essentially because neither of the lawyers was taught professional legal ethics in their law schools, and consequently the apparent failure to appreciate the ethical challenges posed by the legal profession. When asked about the solution to ethical problems in the absence of clear rules, lawyers stated they listen to their gut feeling or other close members in the family. Ironically, and quite surprisingly, one of the clients categorically evinced his awareness about the rules framed by the Bar Council of India (BCI) governing responsibilities of the lawyers. Having said that, such awareness play trivial role because none of the clients interviewed view professional responsibility or ethical standards as a factor in the selection of a lawyer to pursue a lis. The factors that form the yardstick in selection invariably include, market reputation, experience and age of the lawyer. However, the clients cannot be blamed for their choice of selection. This is because, and as it appears from the survey, market reputation is a conclusive proof of a lawyers subscription to ethics. This however, may not be the case always, as one of the lawyers interviewed denied the link between market reputation and subscription to ethics by saying that an ethical lawyer may not be well renowned in the market and vice versa. Whatever is the reason, one fact which emerges unambiguously is that all three clients are fully satisfied with
1

The Survey Report has been prepared as a part of the course on Clinic II, under the supervision of Mr. Anirban Chakroborty Sir.

the quality of services their lawyers provided to them. There remains, however, little dissatisfaction in regards the charging of exorbitant fees at times. This, nevertheless, does not quite upset the litigants if the outcome comes in their favor. To the contrary, lawyers think that the general public image of the legal profession is not at all positive, and that the legal profession is perceived by the society as the one belonging to liars and disloyal professionals. Essentially, in the entire dispute resolution process, ethics has taken a back seat, and victory-driven attitude of lawyers and litigants seems to have stolen the day. The researcher bases his assertion completely on the inferences drawn from the response on pro bono work. Neither of the lawyers engaged themselves in public spirited work. This clearly shows that there is a race for name and fame, but participation in this race has one condition: money. In other words, neither of the two lawyers has made reasonable classifications between the rich and poor clients, and also not taken any initiative in free legal awareness or aid or advice except when otherwise called upon by the Courts as amicus curiae. Not only this, the law on the ban of advertisements imposed by the BCI was also considered to be redundant and absurd, highlighting upon the practical problems such laws breed in living a life of a successful lawyer. When asked about the role of law firms, the lawyers encouraged law students to join law firms and not come to litigation practice since the sum of money a law firm can beget is far greater than what litigators get in court practice. Lastly, both the lawyers completely ignored the duty of a lawyer towards the society, and constantly fixated on the duty towards clients, bar, and the courts. This answer was almost foreseen when the researchers immediately preceding answer on pro bono work was answered in the negative. Importantly, it emerges from the survey that clients themselves have never taken recourse to foul means all by themselves unless asked by their respective lawyers to either conceal their weaknesses or ignore summons issued by courts, or to manipulate facts. And all this has never fetched both the lawyers any disciplinary actions in their career as litigators. Among these negatives, the results of this survey have one positive factor: realizing the best interest of the clients. Lawyers seem to be very loyal to their clients in the pursuit of their court-room disputes. This loyalty is however qualified by some degree of lawfulness, and one of the lawyers would never go against the codified law in order to secure the best interest of the client. Lawyers seem to have an unusually close bonding or what we call in legal parlance fiduciary relationship, with their clients, and the relationship has been considered similar to, if not higher, that of a doctor-patient relationship. When it comes to extracting fees from their clients, lawyers have petite guilt since they believe there is no harm in doing so if the work is done according to the satisfaction of the clients. Essentially, lawyers seem to have this impression of quality service winning over ethical standards when it comes to charging hefty sum of money for even petty case like pursuing a bail matter or the like. There, however, remains some bias in hiring a family lawyer for advice as the general perception is that a family lawyer will be extra considerate and understanding compared to a non-family lawyer.

The researcher concludes this report by one piece of caution: the seriousness of the decrease in the moral standards of the lawyers and litigants is directly attributed to the fact that both the legislature and the courts have been receptive to such kinds of behavior. Therefore, the researcher believes that an activist approach by the echelons of justice would certainly help reduce the number of ethical dilemmas that normally creep in while carrying out ones professional responsibilities in the legal profession. However, at the same time, the researcher concedes to the practical ethical problems faced by lawyers and litigants that require significant counseling and that law alone cannot accomplish much. Such problems, the researcher agrees, shall best be left with the persons concerned, because ethics and morality after all is a choice that an individual has to make. Needless to say, the consequences which follow must be adequately addressed by the letter of the law.