Report comment

We must all agree that no one should be able to offer advocacy services unless s/he knows the law, understands the functioning of the court and is insured in case of malpractice.

We must all agree that these matters should be, to some extent, proved. That way we can be assured that our courts are attended by persons with the capacity to serve them and their clients. The interest of justice, which is a principal interest of the people, is also met.

How can you prove those matters in practice? Well, you might, for example, establish some regulatory bodies which demand that somebody’s skills be demonstrated by examination results and be honed by a period of experience in working environment (that you might like to call, say, a ‘pupillage’ or ‘training contract’). Insurers might be prepared to insure those persons because some evidence will exist of their diligence. Doesn’t this all sound a little familiar?

It’s all about ensuring a high likelihood