Legality and morality are conceptually completely
different. What is legally tenable,may not be
morally so and vice versa. To illustrate the point
a little expansively, a theft is a crime irrespective of
its purpose - even if I steal or rob to save somebody
from starvation. Coming to the role of lawyers
in ensuring fair dispensation of justice,they too
have their own professional and ethical code of
conduct but tragically it is more often flouted and
violated than is permissible by a civilized society.
Legal professionals have a moral binding to their clients who hire them and pay them. The lawyer cannot be expected to earn from his client and show moral responsibility to society which does not pay him. The two are contradictory. Even a terrorist has a right to have a lawyer who will be loyal to him and not to the society. Society interests govt lawyers should take care.
I read a long way back a very pithy definition of the term of law which elucidated it as the highest sense planted in humans and if that be so, we need not grope in the dark as to the role of an ideal lawyer.He should never be a victim of his or her guilty conscience.
It is the job of the lawyer to defend his client once he accepts his brief. There is an opposing lawyer to debunk him if he is presenting false evidence. The question of guilt should not arise.
That's what I feel, if Ghoda ghas se yaari karega to khayega kya' The lawyer as a professional must keep his professional ethics and go all out to protect his client.
I love this free image hosting site for sharing my work
A good comparison. You said Professional ethics. Yes, if every professional belonging to their professions maintain professional ethics, then its Utopia. But such situation is there anywhere in the world ?
Professionalism is fine up to a point but knowing that the client is a hardcore criminal then how does a qualified person have only one track mind that he is in legal profession and is doing his/her job. He/she is a human being too. We all know that the judges are human beings and to err is human so they may pass a wrong judgement on the basis of false witness. Who will be the sufferer? There has to be a sense of social responsibility and not just take it as a mean to increase bank balance.
@Sandhya your point is that if it is known that a person is a hard criminal a lawyer should not protect him. But the legal system gives him also a chance to prove himself innocent and for this he needs a lawyer. This is a just system because if lawyers were to take your advice then so many innocent oersons would be portrayed as hard criminals and punished wrongly.
