New
Living Diary
Index

New  participatory democracy

Taming the Corporations

My Welsh socialism

My New Socialist Settlement

Globalise the left!

Bevan  re-visited

928   16 February2004   

But the circumstances should never have arisen.  Mr Pinesh (not his real name) was an Iraqi Kurd who was caught in a tangled network of connections, following arrest and two-week detention and torture by Saddam's secret police, in mid-2002.  His family paid for him to be smuggled illegally to the UK, where he applied for asylum: he claimed that that his life was in danger both at the hands of Saddam's police and at the hands of the other members of the network, who suspected him of having betrayed them to Police.  He arrived in September 2002, and his wife followed him (also illegally) in November 2002.  But case was not determined by the Home Office until November 2003: his application was refused, and his appeal set down for end-February.  His Solicitor prepared his case, taking a full statement (using an interpreter), and prepared to attend the hearing on behalf.  Then, less than two weeks before the hearing, his Solicitors "withdrew": they said that the White List "presumption" in favour of Iraq meant that his appeal was bound to fail, and that it would be wrong for further public funds to be spent on his representation.  That is a unilateral discretion, it seems, available to the Solicitor.

After 18 months of insecurity in this country, Mr Pinesh and his wife were devastated. The hearing was at a Court some 60-miles away from Swansea, which could not be reached by public transport by the designated 10.00 am start.  I had no alternative but to offer my assistance, both to drive them to the hearing, and assist them with the presentation of the case.  The Solicitors did arrange, as they withdrew, for an interpreter to attend the hearing, and that was entirely satisfactory.

This is my Indictment -

I do not blame the Solicitors - they are facing the steady erosion of legal aid, payable by the hour, and I know that these cases, working laboriously through interpreters, are very time-consuming;

I do not blame the Adjudicator, who was patient and persistent, conducting a fair and considerate hearing, without any undue time-constraint;

But I do blame the system which forced the withdrawal of Mr Pinesh's legal representation just ten days before the hearing, when no alternative arrangements were possible - while I did my best, I have no working knowledge of the current Regulations;

I do blame the "White List" system, which triggered the Solicitors' withdrawal and persuaded them that Mr Pinesh's case was not worth arguing; the White List procedures is inimical to any fair hearing or trial; his evidence deserved to heard, and was capable of overriding the White List presumption;

I do blame the Home Office, who simply failed to attend - "that happens in 50% of the cases", sighed an exasperated Adjudicator - keenly aware that, without the Home Office in attendance, he was automatically suspected of being simply a senior HO Official, doing their bidding - which he was clearly not;

I do blame the Authorities for locating the proceedings in near-inaccessible courtrooms, posing intractable practicable problems for hundreds of refugees in stressful conditions; if refugees are to be dispersed to Swansea, these hearings should also be dispersed to Swansea.

It is clear that these difficulties are likely to accelerate, rather than decline.  I shall have to brush up my advocacy, and start doing some legal homework...

Has anyone else been drawn into this quagmire?  Drop me a line

929  16 February 2004  

The subject for debate will be my scheme for a new advocates' profession comprising non-lawyers - informed citizens qualified and willing to help their fellows to find their way about the systems of modern society, complete forms, write letters, make applications.  It seems, though, that I shall have problems if I use the term "public advocate".

A "Questor" (or Quaestor) was an officer of the Roman Senate - someone to whom the citizenry could turn for information and who could initiate legal proceedings, in the manner of a public prosecutor.  The analogy is not direct, for my Questor would principally perform the first function, not the second.  A Questor would receive a one-year full-time training (not dissimilar, I understand, from that given to CABx Advisers), and would be qualified to advise fellow-citizens on how to find their way through the public and private mazes which they confront - write letters, complete Forms, make applications, address the write public and corporate departments, seek financial assistance where appropriate. 

A Questor would be conscientious to identify matters needing the attention of a professional lawyer, just like a triage nurse deciding when to call in the Doctor.  Questors would be free to "practise" on the High Street, offering their services in a much lower fee-bracket than Solicitors or Barristers.

Our present systems of formal "representation" are far too constricted for contemporary society. They are failing, at a time which demand is set to increase. There is a huge gap between the legal professions and the citizenry, and one which is not bridged by the Legal Aid system.  Nor is there any prospect of that gap being reduced by the operation of "market forces".  Something must be done.

• It is that gap which the
  new profession will address.

Created by GMID Design & Communication

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
The originating content of this website is my own work, and subject to my copyright. But on one condition only, I hereby give my consent to its unrestricted reproduction for any purpose: the condition is that its source is subject to proper acknowledgment, giving my name, my assertion of copyright, and the name of this website as its source, namely: www.warrenevans.net - is that a deal?  Roger WE