Debating if lawyers really help people or whether they just help themselves

Throughout history lawyers have been the instigators of change, challenging the status quo and traditional legal and social understandings through litigation or the threat of it.

Abraham Lincoln said: “Discourage litigation … as a peacemaker the lawyer has a superior opportunity of being a good man. There will still be business enough.” Lincoln’s words resonate; litigation is an expensive, traumatic and very public way to make a point. However, in the 100 years after his death, Lincoln was to have no idea how important litigation, and lawyers, would become in securing equal rights for the Americans he initiated a war to free.

During the American civil rights movement, it is no exaggeration to state that lawyers were the champions of change – Thurgood Marshall chief among them. Marshall successfully argued Brown v Board of Education of Topeka before the US Supreme Court, among the most widely known and widely applauded judgments in history, and achieved the equality in education for African-Americans that had previously been denied to them.

Marshall suffered death threats, police brutality and a constant uphill struggle for support in his efforts towards an end to the discrimination inherent in American society. Though his labours were eventually rewarded with a position on the bench of the Supreme Court, he cannot be accused of being motivated by self-interest. Even as a Supreme Court Justice, he continued to view and employ the law as a means of modifying existing social norms – consistently opposing the death penalty and upholding minority rights.

Marshall is but one example of a lawyer making a notable, positive contribution to public life. Lawyers are in a unique position to make a positive impact on the lives of others; an in-depth knowledge of the law affords a distinct advantage when trying to change it.

The clichéd perception of a lawyer is the corporate suit in a corner office making millions closing deals or finding loopholes in tax legislation. Like any profession, lawyers cannot be categorised so easily. However, whether judicially reviewing administrative decisions or advocating reasonableness in an acrimonious divorce, what all lawyers (even the corporate ones) have in common is their performance of a service that is of value to society.

With an increasing awareness of human rights, it seems that more and more vitriol is directed at those lawyers who argue for the rights of the unpopular few, contrary to the opinion of the majority. The case of Hirst is a prime example, provoking a national furore on the subject of prisoners’ right to vote. “A nation’s greatness is measured by how it treats its weakest members” and the lawyer is the means to ensure that the treatment of the weakest does not contravene the higher standards that human rights law requires.

Most lawyers I know are not compelled by greed. Instead they desire to utilise the law in a way that benefits the general public, to its fullest extent, through bringing cases to challenge unfairness, giving effect to political will through the drafting of legislation or ensuring the right to a fair trial is a meaningful one through competent defence. These are fundamental public services that must be acknowledged and appreciated, a task only achievable through a more accurate understanding of the roles and goals of the lawyer.

l Katherine Spencer is a trainee at the Government Legal Service for Scotland. This is the winning entry in a writing competition launched by the Scottish Young Lawyers Association and the WS Society, which posed the question: ‘Do lawyers really help people or are they just helping themselves?’