Let lawyers heed Chief Justice’s call

DAR ES SALAAM: FRIDAY saw 73rd admission and enrolment of 774 advocates in Dodoma, a great step towards justice delivery, as they are duty-bound to help the courts of law.

On the occasion, Chief Justice (CJ) George Masaju issued a stern warning against the growing tendency of lawyers acting like activists to the extent of going against courtroom morals and reminded legal practitioners to honour the professional oath that obliges them to maintain integrity and respect for the court.

The CJ expressed deep concern over rising indiscipline among members of the legal fraternity, including open disrespect for courts and judges and judicial officers.

He spoke of a trend whereby some advocates acclaim the court only when they win a case, but when they lose, they claim the court is not independent.

The CJ raised important points at the right time, because activism can pose significant challenges for lawyers and advocates by creating conflicts of interest, potentially undermining the perception of neutrality and professionalism and even leading to retaliation or disciplinary action.

These issues can disserve clients and challenge the integrity of the legal system.

There is a matter of ethical conflicts and professionalism. Positional conflicts of interest: When a lawyer engages in public politico-legal activism, they may create conflicts that harm other clients with differing interests, even if those clients are unrelated to the specific activist cause.

Loss of neutrality perception: A core principle of the legal profession is to zealously advocate for a client within the bounds of the law, regardless of personal beliefs.

Strong activism can lead the public and potentially judges, magistrates or opposing counsels, to perceive a lawyer as partisan, which might impact their effectiveness or the perceived fairness of legal proceedings.

Undermining the lawyer-statesman ideal: Some arguments suggest that the ideal of a lawyer as a neutral ‘statesman’ who upholds the rule of law is eroded when they become heavily involved in partisan activism.

Practical and reputational risks is likely, if the lawyers do not heed CJ’s call and reasons are not far to fetch.

ALSO READ: Chief Justice warns lawyers against activism, court contempt

Client relations: Lawyers involved in activism may face conflicts with existing or potential clients who do not support their causes, potentially forcing firms to decline certain engagements or obtain complex consents.

Legal strategy limitations: Activism often relies on public pressure and direct action, which may not align with formal legal procedures. Lawyers might find themselves in conflict with community organisations whose campaign goals and legal strategies diverge, or where litigation might inadvertently create bad precedent for the cause. If lawyers go by CJ’s advice, all these negatives will not occur.