(image source: University of Turku)
In Europe, both secular and
ecclesiastical courts developed towards professionalization, and bar
associations were established since the thirteenth century. In England,
barristers obtained a monopoly on representing clients at court over the
centuries. On the Continent, courts and bar associations regulated advocacy.
Licensing was practiced especially in superior tribunals even before the rise
of the liberal professions in the nineteenth century.
Professionalization tendencies went hand
in hand with the ejecting of lay advocates from courts in many countries. For
example, lay advocates (Winkelschreiber) were forbidden to appear in courts in
the Austrian Empire in 1857. Issued legislation went as far as to threaten lay
advocates with fines and short prison spells. Several other European countries
followed with restrictions, and European-style regulation of advocacy was
adopted in a number of American and Asian countries in the nineteenth and
twentieth centuries.
But yet, especially in more peripheral
regions, laymen with legal skills could have considerable space of action in
courtrooms and outside of them. They could act in court on behalf of others,
counsel people with legal problems, draft legal documents, and so on. Such
legal literacy as human capital and an intangible knowledge asset provided a
way for social mobility in the community. This could create tensions. The
position of the intermediary was a position of power, also open to abuse.
Self-learned advocates and legal literates could be criticized from both sides:
for incompetence by the lawyer elite and for despotism, greed and partiality by
the clientele.
Papers could discuss e.g.:
- how
“professional” and “lay” advocacy was defined
- who
acted as lay advocates
- how
lay advocates learned their trade
- what
kind of cases lay advocates handled (did they e.g. differ from those handled by
professional advocates)
- who
turned to lay advocates (was the clientele of lay and professional advocates
the same?)
- whether
advocacy proved a channel for social mobility
- how
lay advocacy was perceived by the legal profession
- attitudes
towards lay advocates (criticism, praise, etc.)
- attempts
to forbid or regulate lay advocacy
- lay
and professional advocacy as parallel phenomena
Confirmed plenary lectures will be given
by Prof. Sir John Baker (University of Cambridge), Prof. Jane Burbank (New York
University) and Prof. Kjell Åke Modéer (Lund University).
Deadline for paper proposals with
abstracts (max. 400 words) is 16 March 2018. For more information, please
contact Professor Mia Korpiola (mia.korpiola[at]utu.fi).
No comments:
Post a Comment