The participation of a defense lawyer in criminal proceedings by appointment in light of the belief of the proper to get qualified legal aid

“A free lawyer is worse than the prosecutor!” – one among the applicants wrote in his complaint to the Samara district attorney’s room. Is it possible for a desperate woman to supply a biased definition of the so-called defender, who forced her during the investigation to sign the minutes, and insistently “recommended” to confess guilt and threaten otherwise with a significant prison sentence ?! The lawyer simply didn’t hear any arguments that the client had not committed the crime: actually , he sided with the general public Prosecution Office, and thru psychological pressure, he obtained with the investigator the evidence necessary for the investigation. there’s another class of cynical advocates – they weren’t in the least present at the investigation procedures, but they duly implemented and signed all protocols. In such a case, to prove that the accused doesn’t have a lawyer.
Given the appeals from convicts and their relatives received by the Federal Chamber of Lawyers, one can often encounter stark samples of the unfair behavior of some lawyers involved within the criminal proceedings, who formally performed their duty, and played the role of extras. It should be noted that the worst of the matter is that earlier, if the “pocket lawyer” was fundamentally wrong of not interfering within the investigation procedures, they were actually standing by the latter and contributing to the issuance of a conviction. . Let’s check out specific examples from practice.
We are certain that this statement doesn’t reflect the important situation within the field of protecting the rights of citizens and therefore the overwhelming majority of lawyers are completing their duty in straightness . However, supported some negative examples, a negative evaluation is formed for the whole community, and more specifically thereto a part of it which accepts appointments to participate in criminal proceedings within the order of appointment.
It appears that the most guarantee that excludes the participation of a specific lawyer in every case that concerns him, should are to determine a schedule for work, because attorneys who don’t work on a specific day don’t have the proper to participate within the investigation procedures as a specific attorney. However, there are precedents when investigating authorities, bypassing duty attorneys, summon their appropriate “own” lawyers for investigation. At an equivalent time, the tricks of those lawyers vary greatly, and their natural ingenuity suggests such moves that suggest the initiative of their college coordinators, who

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *