Monopoly of advocates: national trends and foreign experience

Keywords: human rights, rule of law, professional legal aid, advocacy, monopoly of advocates, legal services


The author examines the key characteristics of professional legal aid considering national trends of monopoly of advocates and
relevant foreign experience. It is stressed that the special significance of guaranteeing and providing legal aid is currently caused by
objective and subjective factors, including: the growing role of law and legal institutes in satisfaction of economic, political, spiritual
and other interests of individuals; the inability of the majority of citizens to defend their rights and legitimate interests, to protect themselves
from arbitrariness by public authorities, which is caused by lack of legal knowledge and law-enforcement background; insufficient
level of development of legal comprehension and legal culture of citizens, which challenges the usage of basic individual rights,
freedoms and legitimate interests in concrete life situations.
In addition, in most countries significant problems are reported in the mechanism of providing legal aid, which does not comply
with the rule of law principle. It is emphasized that only in the countries of the Anglo-Saxon legal system the monopoly of advocates
has been shaped in an absolute form. However, research by the International Bar Association suggests that, in addition to monopoly of
advocates in court claims, most national jurisdictions prohibit noncertified advocates to provide legal assistance at all. In most European
countries, including Greece, Denmark, Germany, the Netherlands, Portugal, as well as Taiwan, Hong Kong, and the Republic of Korea,
the monopoly of advocates extends far beyond the court actions.
It is concluded that the monopoly of advocates does not mean restricting the freedom of the market of legal services, on the cont -
rary, the adequate regulation and uniform rules that would make the legal aid services more predictable and evolutionary. This would
guarantee everyone equal access to a highly qualified advocate, would nourish the level of legal culture in society and would improve
the quality of court trials and the functioning of the law enforcement agencies. In this way, uniform standards for the provision of legal
aid should be introduced. At the same time, the lack of competent and professional staff makes the very idea of qualified legal aid mea -
ningless, moreover, poor quality services create a real threat of infringement within the rights, freedoms, and legitimate interests of citi -

How to Cite
Shandula, O. (2020). Monopoly of advocates: national trends and foreign experience. Law Review of Kyiv University of Law, 1(3), 50-56.
State and law theory and history. Philosophy of law