The author negatively refers to the postulate contained in the petition to grant persons undergoing legal apprenticeship with discounts for public transport. In her opinion, the situation of apprentices and doctoral students should not be equated, because legal apprenticeship is a form of preparation for practicing a profession, while doctoral studies prepare them to conduct scientific research that will support the development of Polish science, industry and administration. Thus the differentiation of rights of the two groups in question does not violate the constitutional principle of social justice.
The author claims that the Deputy who is also an advocate may be subject to professional disciplinary responsibility for actions that are not inherent in the exercise of the mandate, including public appearances on radio and TV, press releases and websites. They state that the Principles of Ethical Conduct and the Dignity of the Profession of the Bar do not limit freedom of expression parliamentarian and does not impose a restriction of powers and the duty of parliament to come into contact with electorate.
The article analyzes legal professional privilege in the light of provisions of the Advocate’s Profession Act, the Code of Criminal Procedure and the Code of Professional Ethics and Conduct for Advocates. The author raises the question of conflict between Art. 180 § 2 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, which regulates the advocate’s testimonial privilege and its possible waiver by court’s decision, and Art. 6 of the Advocate’s Profession Act, which treats advocate’s privilege as an absolute rule. The article also comments on the views presented in the doctrine and in judicial decisions. In addition, the author provides an interpretation of the legal regulations/norms and discusses the conflict of legal rules between these regulations. For the purpose of comparison, the article also reviews the situation of advocate–witness in civil and administrative procedures. The legal analysis concludes with proposals de lege ferenda.
Celem niniejszego artykułu jest przedstawienie zawodu adwokata w kontekście idei towarzyszących ustanowieniu tej profesji oraz jej praktycznego zastosowania. Zarysowując dzieje adwokatury, autor stara się przybliżyć zadania i obowiązki jakim musi sprostać adwokat reprezentując klienta w postępowaniu sądowym. Duży nacisk położony zostaje na wymogi etyczno- -moralne towarzyszące kontaktom z klientem. Autor stanowczo sprzeciwia się pojawiającym się w świadomości społecznej negatywnym wyobrażeniom o członkach palestry.
EN
The aim of this article is to present the profession of advocate in relation to the underlying rationale of this profession and its actual performance. Outlining the history of the legal profession, author discusses the tasks and responsibilities which the advocate has to face while representing his client in court. Strong emphasis has been placed on the professional ethics requirements connected with the relationship between the advocate and his client. In conclusion author does not accept with negative image of advocates in society.
The author concentrates on the meaning of verse Deut 32,30, especially the statement “their Rock sold them”. Her philological-exegetic-theological analysis of the verse and the verses Deut 32,35a. 36a-b allows us to assume that the sentence in question hides an essential salvational truth. It teaches us that God does not stop being a sure footing for His chosen, even then when − as we say it − He punishes them. On the contrary, He is then their rock, more than in other circumstances. He is therefore Someone on Whom one can always and anytime rely, in Whom one may totally confide. By punishing people, He at the same time appears as the One Who raises from the fall, and change human life for better, transform failure into victory.
The right to defence is a very important indicator of the quality of the rule of law. In the Soviet Occupation Zone of Germany, later the GDR, the legal profession underwent a transformation. Individual defence for defendants was not to be totally abandoned, but it was meant to be subordinated to the interest of the socialist state. The academic study, which has served as the basis for this article, shows the development of the legal profession in East Germany. Due to the analysis of a large number (about 1,800) of legal procedures that were carried out in Berlin by the Ministry for State Security (MfS), the course of political trials and the conduct of advocates in such trials have been studied for the first time. Contrary to the show trials of the 1950s, a characteristic feature for the Honecker era was a short secret trial. The trial culture clearly deteriorated, though a reverse trend could be observed since the mid-1980s. The research aim is to analyze how it happened. The recruitment of advocates, their organisation in district bar associations, their education and disciplinary measures were not insignificant. The role of the MfS in exerting control over advocates and political trials has also been studied. Even if there were drastic cases of interference in the proceedings by the MfS – also through secret collaborators – until now, the control of the judiciary by the said ministry in the late GDR was rather overestimated. What was more influential were the so-called “steering meetings”. These assemblies – which were secret and are still underestimated – contributed to the fact that the course of the procedures was quite uniform and conformed to the dictatorship of the Socialist Unity Party of Germany (SED).
JavaScript jest wyłączony w Twojej przeglądarce internetowej. Włącz go, a następnie odśwież stronę, aby móc w pełni z niej korzystać.