The International Bar Association's council recently met in the Trianon Palace in Versailles -- where the treaty ending the First World War was negotiated -- and debated the question: 'professionalism v commercialism -- do lawyers still want to be a profession?'There is no generally accepted definition of the term 'profession', but the presence of a public interest in the pursuit of the profession's objective is a generally accepted requirement.

From it we derive the notion that ethics are central to the work of individual lawyers.As the servants of a system which seeks to administer justice in society, lawyers are subject to ethical requirements beyond those imposed on any other citizen under general law.

These cover matters such as integrity, independence, confidentiality and dignity.But professional ethics is one of the burning issues facing the legal profession at the moment and it receives virtually no coverage in legal journals and in most partnerships.

This has to change.Why is an abstract idea such as ethics as important as concrete problems such as globalisation, multi-disciplinary partnerships and the arrival of the US firms in London? Because if you lose your distinctiveness in any economic system, you lose your value in that system.

Reputation is everything, and our code of ethics underpins everything we do as solicitors, and hence our distinctiveness.

It is therefore a nice paradox that paying due attention to ethics is enlightened self-interest.How do you meet the charge that there is no difference between accountant, management consultant or solicitor when it comes to seeking commercial advice? If you cannot answer that succinctly you have no right to claim the privileges conferred on you as an officer of the court, a part of the machinery of justice and an upholder of the ethics upon which the whole legal system is built.Privileges, such as the right to assert confidentiality for a client's dealings with you, are underpinned by the public service dimension of the lawyer's involvement in the administration of justice.

The continuing grant of these privileges must depend on the willingness of lawyers to submit to standards of conduct which are compatible with their role -- hence the Law Society's rules on professional practice.The IBA Council debate concluded that it was impractical for the association to impose standards of ethics upon individual lawyers.

The IBA has no way of enforcing such sanctions and would be dependent on local Bars and Law Societies to do so.

A directive from the IBA was discounted; nonetheless, there was a palpable mood at the close of the debate of the overwhelming need for a renewed concentration on the centrality of ethics in legal practice.When a firm wants to focus on the need for effective management it asks one or more partners to take on the responsibility of being answerable to the firm in that area.

That does not detract from the duty of the other partners to be efficient and businesslike.

In the same way, appointing a partner to oversee professional ethics within the practice would not diminish the responsibility of individual partners to act in accordance with the highest ethical standards.It would, however, make a public statement abou t the centrality of the importance of correct ethical behaviour to the practice, and build into its management structure a means by which issues surrounding those ethics can be aired and enforced.This creative tension within the partnership structure will help to ensure that the distinctiveness of lawyers is preserved -- with the attendant professional and commercial advantages.