Thursday, December 18, 2008

At work we have a resource called the wrongful dismissal database. It is basically a collection of court decisions in cases of people who have been laid off or fired, and it gives examples how much notice and severance the person should receive depending on age, years of service, their position, etc. Once a lawyer asked me to run a couple of searches and was looking at the average notice at the end of each result. I asked him, "So that's what you're looking for, a certain average?" He replied, "Well, it depends what side we're on." I found that statement shockingly revealing because it's something I've often thought about that is a problem with the nature of the law. This was an admission that he's not looking to see what the law actually says about what should be done, but how he can manipulate it in an argument.

A lawyer's job is not to find the truth in a case, it is not to get to the bottom of what a law is really about to make sure that justice is done. Rather, it is to find a law that can be interpreted in a certain way that will enforce the rights of the client. It's no secret that people with money often get away with crimes the rest of us wouldn't because they can afford better legal help than the poor and other non-rich masses. But why is that? It's because when you hire a lawyer, right or wrong, you pay them to convince the judge or jury to interpret the law in a way that favours you. An ideal, which would never happen and, besides, is also open to abuse in pretty obvious ways, would be an independent committee of lawyers who decide each case based on an impartial study of the law. You can still leave room for appeals and complaints because there's always the possibility of a mistrial, but I just think this would be the only way to have equality before the law, rather than have 2 parties representing clients (who are normally paying them) to plead their case, with the result that the one who's more convincing wins. Of course, true impartiality is impossible and there's no reason to go into the reasons my idea won't ever come into existence, but it's an idea that's occurred to me that I thought I'd share in case anyone else (if anyone ever reads this) has an opinion on it.