Inscrivez-vous ou connectez-vous pour rejoindre votre communauté professionnelle.
Based on the legal system, the answer would strikingly appear as a "yes." The simple reason for this is due to the fact that the purpose of the lawyer is not to show whether his client did or did not commit the crime, but rather, whether there is enough evidence to prove that they did commit the crime. While morally, there may be some issues with representing such a client, the legal system stands for providing every individual with the right to a just and fair trial.
This is a question often posed to criminal defence lawyers about the morality of their decision when it comes to representation of a client they believe is guilty.
When undertaking a representation, if the lawyer feels that the client is guilty of a crime, that in and of itself does not justify declining representation. A competent and professional lawyer would pursue the defence because ethically speaking every person deserves competent and professional representation. A lawyer’s function is to defend a client of a crime, regardless of what they personally believe the client has committed. The lawyer’s position in such an instance isn’t to judge a client – the judiciary and the finders of fact and of law exist to protect such sentiment. It is up to the lawyer to use whatever tools are available at their disposal to obtain an acquittal or a disposal or the best outcome they can obtain. The lawyer is just one of the advocates in an otherwise imperfect system.
Everyone in this earth without exception nationality race religion , have the right to legal assistance . And liability lawyer is obliged to carry out its responsibility to provide legal assistance to the person. And it is the responsibility of the profession .
Yes, because everybody has a right for legal aid. There can be circumstance that can affect the final decision and penalty, and it will be laywer's responsibility to prove them.
Well,After reading all those answers by the other lawyers mates.
I'd Like to Say Our name in the society is (Lawyers) not (Liars) which Leads to another Fact that The Lawyer career wasn't made to change the facts.Or Wastes someone's else rights..
So I'd Say this Important principal I Will Defend some one that committed they are guilty just to get them Appropriate punishment In order to prevent injustice, not to prove they are innocent.
Dear Salma Fakih
I would say that its a very thought provoking question being asked by you. certainly the general public has the idea in mind that the lawyers defend the criminals.
Let me first of all give you a general idea about the major two kinds of litigation
1. Civil
2. Criminal
Civil suit and the criminal case.
Mainly civil suits depends upon documents whereas criminal cases depends upon the facts/place of occurence etc etc so there is a less probability of lies in civil suits than in criminal cases.
Every body knows there is element of good and bad in every walks of life even in every individual. so it depends on every individual how to tackle the things out.
Technically/legally A Lawyer has to defend his client and it is a fundamental right of very person either real or a jusristic one to be defended/represented/hire the legal services of a lawyer.
A lawyer is a substabtial part of a society and has many responsibilities in this regard. If all the wrong doers are being defended and are acquitted by the courts by the support of a lawyer then there would be a chaos in the society.
But on the other hand it is not the case in every issue that one has to be on the right and the other has to be wrong, no, sometimes even both are right. sometimes both are on the wrong and sometimes both have something right and wrong at the same time, A lawyer has to sought it out, some times its sought it out sometimes at the initial stages of the suit or a case and sometimes at the later stage.
So we have to help the victim and the cruel at the same time, helping the victim to get his rights or to be compensated and helping the cruel/wrongdoer to understand that he did a mistake and make him realize it and a chance to repent and become a positive member of the society again.
Punishments are not meant to penalize rather to make any one realize his mistakes.
I think it would suffice , but if you have some more questions feel free to ask
yes i shall defend and show the causes why this person commited the crime and try to utermost the support and faviour the my clint by my legal skill
Yes, In case the client admit the crime and I felt that he would not do it again, we cannot judge a person by one mistake. If the client are used to commit crimes, I will refuse.
I have studied Professional ethics and Constitutional law are two important subject in my LL.B., therein I was learned that once accepted the brief we should be sincere and should not go against the professional ethics as a Advocate and the Indian constitutional law has provided a fundamental right to accused in a criminal case i.e right to defend as in that stage the person committed is an accused only until it is proved by prosecution.
I too studied Jurisprudence therein morality is the bigger set which includes law, justice. so personally I would not take up the case if I have knowledge that the person has done the crime and use my skill to bring the wrong person to get out from the punishment. Thanks.
yes , If i am convince of the innocence
As a lawyer you must defend all defendants according to the legal rule that said that the defendant is innocent until proven that he is guilty and its right for every defendant to have a lawyer present him in criminal cases.
