General
|
| Q |
Doesn’t this initiative let the government off the hook in relation to adequate funding of legal aid and Community Legal Centres?
|
| A |
No. The Statement of Principles for the Target clearly recognises, in its Preamble, ‘that pro bono is not a substitute for the proper funding by government of Legal Aid agencies and Community Legal Centres’. The Centre encourages the profession to direct its limited pro bono resources into areas other than those where government clearly bears the prime responsibility - such as in criminal and family law. |
| Q |
Why at least 35 hours per year? |
| A |
The Centre believes that this is an appropriate benchmark. Data collected by the Centre indicates that many lawyers already meet this target. It is about 45 minutes per lawyer per week. |
| Q |
Won’t this become a mandatory minimum for the profession? |
| A |
No. The Target simply reflects the amount of pro bono work that many lawyers in Australia are already doing. The Target is aspirational only and we are not advocating a mandatory imposition. No adverse consequence flows from not meeting the Target. |
| Q |
Isn’t there a danger that lawyers will do 35 hours a year and no more? |
| A |
No. Most lawyers are motivated to undertake pro bono work by the satisfaction of helping someone who wouldn’t otherwise be able to obtain legal assistance, not by meeting an annual hourly target. |
| Q |
Why formalise a lawyer’s pro bono commitment at all? |
| A |
The principal aim of the Target is to raise the visibility of the ethical obligation of a legal professional to conduct pro bono work acros the profession and publicly. It raises this professional obligation from a fuzzy concept to a benchmark for the conduct of pro bono work.
Commitment to the Target confirms the shared professional responsibility of lawyers to provide pro bono assistance. It is part of the broader ethical obligation of lawyers to help provide access to justice to those who wouldn't otherwise obtain it.
|
| Q |
Why is a lawyer’s general community service excluded from the definition of pro bono legal services? |
| A |
General community service work by a lawyer is not the provision of legal services. Lawyers are the only persons who can provide legal services. The Target aims to raise the profile and increase the provision of pro bono legal services, not general community service work. |
| Q |
Why is the Centre advocating this Target? |
| A |
The Centre believes the Target will further our objective of promoting pro bono work throughout the legal profession. |
| Q |
Who else supports this Target? |
| A |
There has been widespread support for the Target across the profession. The Law Council of Australia have indicated that individual barristers and solicitors should make their own decision as to whether they wish to a signatory to the principles. The Target is also endorsed by organisations including, amongst others, the National Association of Community Legal Centres and the Human Rights and Equal Opportunities Commission. Furthermore,
- In 1998, the Law Society of NSW’s Access to Justice Task Force Report recommended establishing a voluntary “minimum pro bono commitment”;
- In 1999 the Law Institute of Victoria resolved to encourage its members to dedicate one hour per week to pro bono work;
- In 2000, the Australian Law Reform Commission Report No. 79 Managing Justice: A Review of the Federal Civil Justice System (2000) recommended that legal professional associations urge their members to undertake pro bono work each year;
- In 2002, the Chesterman Review of the New South Wales Solicitors and Barristers Rules recommended that consideration be given to including an aspirational target of a prescribed number of pro bono hours within the Solicitors’ Professional Conduct and Practice Rules.
|
For firms
|
| Q |
Why sign up if you don’t think you or your firm are going to meet the Target? |
| A |
The Target is aspirational only. Signing up indicates a commitment shared with other lawyers to undertake pro bono work at a level that is already occurring in many areas of the profession. The time taken to reach or exceed the Target matters less than acknowledgement of the shared commitment. |
| Q |
Can firms average their commitment across all the lawyers in the firm? |
| A |
Yes. Even the work done by law graduates can count towards the Target. |
Measurement
|
| Q |
Doesn’t measuring pro bono contribution in hours worked mean that more junior lawyers and secondees will be used as an easy way to reach the total number of hours required? |
| A |
It shouldn’t. Firms shouldn’t change the way they approach the provision of pro bono legal services in order to meet the Target. The Target is aspirational only and there is no downside to not meeting it. No method of measurement is perfect but hours worked provides one clear method. |
| Q |
What happens if a signatory does not meet the Target? |
| A |
The Target is aspirational only. There will be no adverse consequence for any lawyer or firm who does not meet the Target. The Centre will not publicise the name of any lawyer or firm who signs up and does not meet the Target in any particular year. |
| Q |
How will the Centre measure whether signatories have met the target? |
|
A
|
Each year signatories will be asked to complete a form which details their pro bono contribution. A standard form will be used to ensure the integrity of the measurement process. The Centre can provide guidance about measurement but does not want to create detailed metrics. |
