Lawyers say government willing to revise warrant abolition proposal

The Chamber of Advocates has expressed “cautious optimism” that Justice Minister Edward Zammit Lewis will revise his plan to abolish the need for a warrant to practise law except for those who work in court.

The Chamber had a meeting with the minister on Monday. It said in a statement on Thursday that  he “was receptive to their concerns and, after a discussion, agreed to consider detailed submissions from the Chamber on changes to the Bill.”

“The Chamber looks at this with cautious optimism, and augers that for the sake of the profession, their representations and detailed submission on changes in the law will form the basis of a new regulatory regime for the profession,” it said.

The meeting was held after the chamber expressed concerns that the changes would only regulate those working in the law courts while lawyers in other areas, such as companies and gaming firms, would not be regulated.

Some lawyers said the proposal, which had already started being debated in parliament, was "mind-boggling". 

The chamber said its ultimate objective was to be able to devise a comprehensive plan for the regulation of all the profession. It explained that there were a number of issues that needed to be changed in the current Bill, while avoiding having a regulatory framework “that could be insidious to the profession in the short term”.

It said it insisted during the meeting with Zammit Lewis that no person should be able to provide any legal services to any other person unless that person held a warrant by the State.

"The warrant is a confirmation that such a person has not only achieved a minimum level of competence in the practice of law, but has been found to be fit and proper to be admitted to the profession, is of good conduct and repute, is part of a regulated profession and will be required on a continuing basis to observe a set of ethical principles in the conduct of his/her profession."

It conceded that there is a case to be made for law graduates who have no intention of working in court to be subjected to a different warrant examination, which is not focused on court procedures. However, these should be considered as two strands of the same profession and not as two independent professions.

Moreover, all lawyers ought to remain subject to the same regulatory regime, the same code of ethics and to the same regulator.  The Committee for Advocates and Legal Procurators should have the same powers over non-court lawyers in matters of regulation and discipline. 

The chamber also emphasised the need of a definition of what constitutes ‘legal services’ and what legal services can be provided by which strand of the profession. 

The chamber said it will be submitting its proposed changes to the Bill by Monday.