Ethical Dilemma on the Nigerian legal loyalty.

-

Is the legal practitioner's loyalty first to the COURT? Or his CLIENT? 

To state the obvious, Rules 14 to 25 of the Rules of Professional conduct speaks on the general and specific duties that a legal practitioner owe to his client while Rules 30 to 38 devotes to a lawyer’s duty to the court. The former provides that lawyers must dedicate to the cause of his client and the later provides lawyers being officers of the court. It arouses a twist as to whom the lawyers first loyalty must be to, Is it to the court, alternatively, his client?

In reality, a lawyer who has his overriding interest as the court, his client is most likely to suffer, seeing that even though he wants justice to prevail, he also wants that his client is happy. He is made a compulsory officer of the court and in much so, was enrolled to the bar to serve the court but does this effect much on his client? Yes! A client does not want a lawyer who goes to court and instead of being by him, is saying yes to everything the judge says all to promote justice.

On the other hand, if premium is placed on client’s interest, the court will suffer delay of justice, selfish interests’ protection, sentiments and procedural frustration. This is because the lawyer wants to win the case rather than justice to prevail; he does not care whether the court rules rightly or wrongly as long as the interest of his client gets judgement in his favour, thus, a question is raised again as to whom should the loyalty first be?

Rule 1 of the RPC seem to answer the question by saying that a lawyer shall uphold the rule of law, which not only brings everyone under the law but allows for a balance of loyalty. It implies to me that the loyalty of a lawyer to the court ends where justice is no longer upheld towards his client, this is not to say that the lawyer shall now contravene rule 36 on courtroom decorum to show his bitterness but by procedures already laid down. Rule 15 of RPC lays down the obligation of the legal practitioner representing his client within the bounds of law, which denotes that even though his maximum interest is that his client wins, it must be within the bounds of law.

A lawyer who thinks not of justice is his own lawyer and not the lawyer of the court, a lawyer who thinks not of his client should never have been one! Hence, a balance must be struck, while upholding justice, it must first be for your client to maximise that justice, if client has no basis for justice, let him face the law in its lightest form.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

RELEVANCE OF NATURAL LAW

-
Different legal theories developed throughout societies. Though there are a number of theories, only four of them are dealt with here under. They are Natural, Positive, Marxist, and Realist Law theories. Natural law theory is the earliest of all theories. It was developed in Greece by philosophers like Heraclitus, Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle. It was then followed by other philosophers like Gairus, Cicero, Aquinas, Gratius, Hobbes, Lock, Rousseau, Kant and Hume. n their studies of the relation between nature and society, these philosophers have arrived at the conclusion that there are two types of law that govern social relations. One of them is made by person to control the relations within a society and so it may vary from society to society and also from time to tome within a society. Before the 19th Century, natural law was the prevalent theory of jurisprudence. In short, natural law proposes that certain universal moral principles transcend man-made laws. From a Judo-C...
Read more

A lil on Passion lol

-
Some 15 years back, at any time I watch the big screen, I thought of what on earth I could possibly be, I hated the slightest hearing of primary education, not to talk of all that it is about. I loved to learn informally, though formal in a way. Not in a classroom, any where else.... Nature for sure took its course, and I had to grow up, finding the interest to study law and to bear its risks.  For me, the subject of law is a risk which anyone who undertakes it should be prepared to face its outcome with head held very high. Risk of fighting the loop holes of the law, risk of knowing what to do and at when to do them, and even as a student, the risk of listening in college and finding the lectures interesting even when they are not. After my Secondary school, I was in dilemma whether or not to continue with the purposed legal studies, I had friends and family who wanted me to though a part of my family never appreciated it, they suggested computer engineeri...
Read more

BEING OBJECTIVE IN LAW

-
Image
Its being like the changes in a butterfly for me, from egg to larva, to pupa and then to adult, but this time, not biologically or physiologically as it is with them, but in my OBJECTIVE. it has changed severally due to internal and external influences that constitutes inhibiting factors to what conclusions I have come to. it ranged from thinking on how much luxury I needed for the future to what I am drawn to, and you know, in between both, they had changed further. Being Objective is being narrowly confined to a particular point of focus, it is being decisive, unwavering, purposeful which always comes with reasons like goals, dreams, aspirations, interests and what have you. In the field of law, there are several branches like:            Criminal laws            Family and Juvenile laws            Health Laws            Co...
Read more