The Ministry of Justice has developed a Draft Law “On Making Amendments and Addenda to the Law on Advocacy” within the framework of the strategic direction of the reform of advocacy sector. It has not yet been submitted for public discussion, but was sent to the Chamber of Advocates and all acting advocates for collection of preliminary opinions. Iravaban.net has started a series of interviews, which aims to present the observations and opinions of the advocacy community on the proposed changes.
We talked about the topic with Grigor Minasyan, Candidate of Juridical Sciences, Advocate.
– In your opinion, what is the objective for implementing such changes?
– I am deeply convinced that the sphere of advocacy and legal services is growing after the revolution of 2018. Any process, including doing business, signing contracts, and even marriage, is now practiced by advocates, and there is almost no relationship or field of activity where you can act without an advocate.
That is why our profession has become one of the most popular. Given the current pace of development in the world, it is natural that all sectors, especially the field of advocacy, and especially post-revolutionary Armenia, need reforms to make the field more flexible.
– One of the proposed changes refers to the review of the role of the Board of the Chamber of Advocates and the Chairman of the Chamber in the executive management relations of the Chamber of Advocates, giving priority to collegial management. How do you feel about this proposed change?
– I am in favor of the way of governing with a collegial body, and our “AM” law firm has also adopted that model. I can assure that one person cannot manage and make decisions more effectively than a collegial body. This is how the world’s leading organizations are governed, and the collegial governance model is the best for making the right and effective decisions. The Board of the Chamber of Advocates is composed of experts and professionals, and in my opinion, the more the powers of the Board are expanded, the more effective the activity of the structure will be.
– Should the powers of the Chairman of the Chamber be limited?
– It is necessary to give wider powers to the collegial body, the Board of the Chamber of Advocates, in order to bring an effective balance between the Chairman of the Chamber and the Board. I am convinced that the more intelligent and professional people are involved in the work and decision-making processes, the more the efficiency of the structure will increase.
– Should the Chairman of the Chamber be apolitical or it is not applicable and not important in case of advocacy?
– Today Armenia is in such a difficult period that it is very difficult for all of us to be apolitical, not to be interested or not involved in politics, and being a lawyer you are much more involved in political processes, because we all have clients who are politicians, and one way or another we are dealing with politics. An individual advocate, of course, has no obstacles in engaging in politics, but I strongly believe that the Chamber itself should not be a politicized body and used as a structure in the political race, as it will lead to conflicts of interest and unhealthy competition between us advocates.
– Mr. Minasyan, one of the proposals for changes refers to the possibility that the Public Defender’s Office will be able to organize public protection of persons through other persons who are not public defenders. Will the change be appropriate?
– Not only appropriate, but in addition an important and expected regulation is proposed regarding the activity of the Public Defender as well. This is a very positive change, as a result of which the current workload of the Public Defender’s Office will be significantly alleviated.
Novice lawyers will have the opportunity to gain professional experience in public defense through the Public Defender’s Office, and the Public Defender’s Office will be able to oversee their activities. An even broader regulation could be envisaged, providing opportunity of public protection not only to individual lawyers, but also to the law firms, so that they, also, could provide free legal services without violating tax legislation.
– Which of the other changes proposed by the Ministry of Justice are problematic and what are the risks on the way to their implementation?
– Every reform includes a risk, if the persons related to a specific sphere do not take part in it. In this case, all lawyers were given the opportunity to get acquainted with the submitted draft in advance and submit their professional proposals to the body implementing the reforms. I am aware that the Ministry of Justice and the Chamber of Advocates are holding joint discussions, and I hope that we will finally have a document that will bring the structure to a qualitatively new level.
– How do the advocates perceive the proposed changes? Do you associate them with the results of the recent election of the Chairman of the Chamber?
– As far as I was able to follow the press and social networks, I did not encounter negative reactions, and in my personal contacts with my colleagues I recorded a constructive approach by everyone. However, it is natural that certain specialists in the field will have their own approaches and suggestions or disagreements with the proposed changes.
I hope that all these and future reforms will contribute to the establishment of a stronger and more united Chamber of Advocates.
