Last updated:

January 28, 2025

A Look at the Results of the Independence of the Bar Association and Judiciary Lawyers / Mohammad Hadi Jafarpour

Simultaneously with any challenge against the institution of advocacy, the issue of the presence of an independent lawyer in litigation is raised. But what is meant by this claim? Some say that since lawyers receive a fee for their work, they should not claim to be defenders of people’s rights. Do lawyers have a response to this claim? Why do lawyers say that having an independent lawyer is part of the rights of the nation? What is meant by an independent lawyer? Apart from the discussions on fair trial and the necessity of having a lawyer to fulfill this right as one of the fundamental rights of the nation, which is also mentioned in the Iranian Constitution in Chapter Three under the title of the rights of the nation, it is necessary to explain the issue in the form of a few simple examples, away from legal-technical discussions.

Imagine that one of the citizens has been involved in a lawsuit with one of the government organizations for any reason (such as the municipality or the department of assets). In this situation, is that respected citizen willing to entrust the defense of his legal rights to a lawyer who has obtained his license from the government or the Ministry of Economy? Can such a lawyer, who has been granted a license to practice by one of the government organizations, confidently and peacefully defend the rights of his client against that government organization, or will he be present in court with hesitation and fear of having his license revoked?

Another example is in political and security cases. Does a lawyer who has been granted a license by the government have the courage to file a lawsuit against the government or defend the accused in a case where one of the pillars of the government, such as the Revolutionary Guard, the Intelligence Agency, etc., is the plaintiff? We have witnessed a clear and undeniable example of this issue in the events of the past year. From the problems that people had with some lawyers of Article 48, to the issues raised by some defendants in complaints about the performance of these lawyers, to the retrial of lawyers in the case of young people who were sentenced to death, which led to the violation of their execution order, are among the examples that can be mentioned.

But what does it mean to be independent? Contrary to the beliefs and claims of some opponents of the institution of advocacy who try to instill in people’s minds that lawyers must be independent from the entire system of governance, it must be said that the meaning of independence is that a lawyer, under the supervision and laws of the disciplinary and judicial authorities, such as the Disciplinary Court of the Bar Association and the Supreme Court of Judges, defends the rights of the people without any affiliation to the branches of government. It is necessary to mention that there are several institutions that oversee the behavior and actions of lawyers, from the Bar Association’s disciplinary court to the Supreme Court of Judges, the Department of Protection and Information of the Judiciary, the Bar Association’s Inspection Commission, and others, which, according to disciplinary and professional regulations governing the profession of advocacy, investigate any misconduct by lawyers. Therefore, the issue of lawyers has nothing to do with monitoring their performance, but their only concern is to adhere to

Another point that needs to be addressed in response to those who say “But don’t lawyers work for free?” is that annually, more than thousands of pro bono and pro bono cases are announced by lawyers for free, and thousands of free consultations are provided by lawyers in the legal aid unit and bar association, which are among the professional and ethical duties of lawyers, and they proudly offer such services to their fellow citizens.

These points are the simplest answer that can be given about the necessity of a lawyer and the bar association being independent.

As for shedding light on the subject, it is necessary for the decision of the parliament, the legal philosophy of this law and its basis, which is to examine the general policies of the specific system mentioned in accordance with Article 44 of the Constitution, in order to respond to the statement of the Regulatory Board and the claim of Amir Siyah, who claims to defend the rights of the nation and eliminate monopolies in economic activities, to be specifically determined. In the event of the dissolution of the independence of the Bar Association, what will happen?

Following the recent decision of the parliament, which resulted in the dissolution of the only civil institution in the country – namely the Bar Association – with more than a century of credibility and inherent independence, it became necessary to briefly review the necessity of the existence of civil institutions. This raises the question whether there is a way for freedom of expression and transmission of the people’s expectations and demands in various organizations and professions in the political-legal structure of Iran.

The simplest and most common way in which a human can express their expectations and desires is by voicing their concerns and preoccupations, which is considered one of the most fundamental human rights in all legal systems and philosophical schools of thought. Theorists and philosophers have been striving to secure this right and find ways to implement it, by identifying practical methods and criticizing the performance of governing powers and institutions in creating a suitable platform for the realization of this important matter.

Based on the importance of ensuring this right as a human right, the question arises whether there is a proper and effective way in the legal structure of Iran for individuals from all classes and groups to express their expectations without any fear or anxiety. What is the practical method for achieving such expectations? Undoubtedly, the most common way to convey these expectations is through independent professional organizations and civil institutions. Is there a possibility in the legal-judicial system of Iran for workers, teachers, lawyers, doctors, etc. to express their thoughts and expectations through an organization that aligns with minimum global standards?

Before answering this question, it is necessary to briefly mention the history of the oldest civil institution in the country, namely the Bar Association of Lawyers, and analyze the fate and legal status of this institution in today’s society. The history of the institution of advocacy in Iran dates back to the late years of the reign of Mozaffar al-Din Shah, when the title of “lawyer” entered the legal literature of the country. After the Constitutional Revolution, the late Hassan Pirnia, as the Minister of Justice, formed a commission in 1908 to revise the laws, with the subject of translating foreign laws and drafting new regulations. The first resolution of this commission was the Law of Judicial Organization, which was approved with the help of the late Modarres in the mentioned commission. According to the provisions of this resolution, individuals who wanted to practice the profession of advocacy were required to pass an exam held by the judiciary. Although this regulation brought a special order and discipline to the profession of

But what we have seen from the beginning of the recent formation of the parliament is not just a legislative matter based on the needs of society, but rather a display of a kind of arrogance with the institution of advocacy in the actions of the parliament, to the extent that none of the criticisms and flaws are heard about the proposals and bills; so much so that we witness a kind of immorality from the present representatives in the relevant commissions. Representatives who in meetings with the managers of the institution of advocacy promise to pay attention to the opinions of society, but in practice act contrary to what they have promised.

With this description, what has been approved today in the legislative and commission against the institution of lawyers is nothing but the dissolution of the only civil institution of the country; the same institution that the political authorities of the country introduce as a symbol and sign of the rule of law and the realization of fair justice in international forums. It is a pity that thousands of lawyers have been spending their mornings for days, emphasizing the importance of the rule of law and respecting the minimum legal rights in various ways and methods, but it seems that there is no one listening.

“In the land where I and my peers live, the principle and rule of governance is defined as following the path of law and striving for justice, with the necessary prerequisite being the implementation of laws and adherence to their provisions. However, it seems that some individuals have become so consumed by power and position that they have forgotten that upholding and enforcing the religious and moral obligations is more important than maintaining authority and the pillars of government.”

The historical background of the Bar Association highlights the fundamental fact that this civil-legal institution has always been dedicated to serving the people and upholding justice throughout its honorable existence. Its soldiers of justice have never shied away from any effort in defending the law and striving for the implementation of justice, staying true to their nature and essence of defending rights and fighting against injustice.

Who is the one who does not know that the lawyers of this association have defended the rights of the nation and homeland in international disputes without any hesitation, and have succeeded in condemning the opposing parties, reviving the rights of the motherland in international bodies, and establishing the presence and vitality of the lawyers’ association as defined in the Declaration of Independence, not as a sign of weakness, but as a sign of the power of the Islamic Republic system. With this description, the various attacks and challenges that have been imposed on these veteran soldiers of justice in various forms and ways, have taken the breath of the soldiers of justice, and are trying to change, not to mention destroy, the nature of the lawyers’ association against domestic laws and international treaties.

It is strange that today, the voice and call of a throat that has been shouting for justice for over a century and has brought its voice to the ears of everyone for the sake of upholding the rights of the oppressed, is not heard.

Created By: Mohammad Hadi Jafarpour
September 23, 2023

Tags

4 Treaty of Tordesillas Bar Association Gathering of lawyers Independence of lawyers Independent adjudication Lawyer Mohammad Hadi Jafarpour Monthly Peace Line Magazine peace line Power of attorney