Restricting Legal Aid And Implicatins To Fair Justice Systems

Essay structure: this essay shall have the introduction according to which the concept of legal aid shall from examine from its historical development and its rationale in UK. Secondly laws related to this policy shall be identified. The body shall explore scholarly views for and against the cuts to legal aid as well as demonstrating authoritatively to basis for such literature. Finally the conclusion shall be made at the closure of this discussion. Introduction: According to Ling Vicky, whose journal elaborately underscores the historical development of Legal aid, asserts prior 1949 this reform was long overdue, until the late 1949 that the first legal aid laws were enacted under the UK policy. Of which these reforms were accordingly tailored to enhance access to legal services for divorce and matrimonial problems. It is more over contended by then, most of the population qualified for legal aid services. On the contrary light of the above changes it has become the proposed reforms it has become increasingly apparent that only few people can qualify. Before analysing whether the legal aid cut reforms conflict right UK's obligation under the 1950 ECHR, it is worthwhile citing the laws related to legal aid, the legal framework of which includes; Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act which classifies civil and criminals matters respectively, while under the Administration of Justice Act 1985 c. 61, Sec 40 and 41 legal aid is also extends to complaints made against barristers and solicitors, meanwhile the functioning statue for legal aid services is enshrined under Access to Justice Act of 1999. It is worthy appreciating the role legal aid plays in criminal and civil cases of family law as advanced by Bettinson. J. Vanessa even though it is indeed unsurprising and yet emphatic to note how similar observations were initially made by Ling. Vicky. Read between lines, the scholars' discussions are handy in examining the implications of cuts to legal aid. This argument is viably true more so in the context of weakening the protective role legal aid services play in the family relations as exemplified in cases of domestic violence. Bettinson. J. Vanessa explores this topic further use her discussion to import the relationship between legal aid services and the informative role such services play in contributing to a fair hearing especially in cases of domestic violence. And conversely to in enhancing the access to legal representation more so to spouses from less privileged financial position. One might justifiable further this argument to equality arms details of which are explained by Harris D.J. Boyle M. O and two others, for example Bettinson. J. Vanessa asserts, "The Legal Services Commission, the body responsible for administering the legal aid system in England and Wales noted a decline in the number of applications it received for funding non-molestation orders." The instrumental role played by the above body could be perceived as part of UK's compliance with the Convention's obligations. Especially with respect to fair hearing in addition to protecting family rights under the European Convention on human rights. Therefore given the proposed reforms of introducing cuts to legal aid support, such a move paves way for yet another logical though relatively debatable argument with regards to the correctional relationship between legal services, access to courts and economic status an idea propounded by Ling. Vicky. "If practitioners can develop low cost family law services, they may be able to reach those who are not sufficiently poor to qualify for legal aid, but who cannot afford traditional private client fees." Accordingly modern thinkers predict how legal aid cuts would result into some family lawyers would either become discouraged or intolerant to rendering legal services or representative to civil petitions from especially poor spouses. Thence the magnitude of cuts on legal aid must not be over looked given the central role family plays in child up bring and its welfare ultimately the effects are far reaching. Mclvor. Claire who largely centres on Jackson reforms and its and access to justice for cases of personal injury also propounds views with critics of the cut reforms. In the interim Craig Sarah an advocate for legal aid in support of fair hearings to immigration and asylum cases also wonders and indeed demonstrates her argument with three immigration and asylum cases that were granted judicial review. She seems particularly concerned with the misleading presumption that the threshold used in claiming that expenses on legal aid are too much. And yet ironically, the usual practice shows how amounts remitted for legal aid in civil matters variably defer depending on extend of appeals, reviews involved (like in immigration). Accordingly, it is worthwhile indicating the cases even subtle sums as compared to personal injury or professional negligence claims. in a way, this points towards article 14 since litigants may lack legal backing to even identify the absence of the legal remedy which legally legal personnel is most likely to do. It is on the basis of the fact that most cases inflicted are civil, in his journal Krtizer. Herbert. M arguably made a similar observation although in his legal assessments conclude the effect of legal aid cuts will imply even more legal constrains to civil cases as opposed to criminal cases. This wills consequently constraining the access to court but also portray UK as state lessening measures that could promote fair hearing under the civil justice system. Having notably discussed the above, on the other hand the freedom states enjoy to certain extent justifies the credibility of actions to reduce the cuts on legal aid. Imperatively this argument know to partly stems from the interpretation of European Human Rights event margin of appreciation concept that leaves room to exercise of state sovereignty in resolving matters. The same view has been advanced by Brad R. Roth and reviewed by Parfitt. Rose "Human rights norms', for example, 'are, as a matter of legal presumption, obligatory but not compulsory. States are, at once, legally bound by obligations and legally protected from the very coercion that may be required to assure their compliance. " As citied that role of legal aid extended to cover complaints against barristers and solicitors as this was the judicial position in R V Visitors to the Inns of Court Exp. Calder however this role of legal aid promoting legal efficiency might indirectly be compromised in light of the strict qualification criteria for civil matters has under the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act of 2012. On the other hand under part 2 of the Access to Justice Act the recovery of insurance premiums as one of the lawfully sources of funding for legal aid. Apparently this funding benefit has been denied following the repealing of the above provision of the Access to Justice Act by the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act of 2012; this view has been furthered by I.R. Scott and Paul Fisher in their respective journals. On the contrary, Hunter Caroline has notably indicated that if the funding is no longer available, then it is high time the legal costs involved also become even more restricted, Even though Hunter makes a logically viable observation more so if construed from the financial perspective. Nevertheless it might sound contrary view to scholars like Rowland J.V. Cole, who emphatically analysis aid in Botswana to demonstrate his support the equality of arms doctrine if the justice system is to bear credibility of fairness and natural justice. Therefore funding avenues The above legal developments and reforms must but be constructed in line with the human rights themes regarding the right of a fair hearing and facilitating the effective participation in trial by litigants of ECHR. Skinner. Paul uses judicial precedents to exemplify how the current stance of legal aid cuts shall portray UK as an advocate of wealthy orientated justice system. "example, in Steel v United Kingdom the Court was at pains to emphasise the gross inequality between the parties on the one side two protesters with no means who had been handing out flyers, on the other McDonalds as a condition of requiring there to be legal aid available."

This view holds weight in light of the numerous civil cases already critically examined from scholarly literature. In the interim, McCluskey. David appreciates the instrumentally noble role legal a freedoms play in contributing toward protection of constitutional values, democracy and protection of rights of individual liberties or rights. Mores so such protection is important to conserve good governance check arbitrariness of decisions by authorities. Conversely this has been obliquely examined, mindful of the central role courts play in regulating the administrative powers, actions and decisions of public authorities. Craig Sarah's discussion is helpful in this regard to explain how legal aid is undeniably useful in cases where administrative decisions have been made. Take for have Pleasence. Pascoe, Kemp. Vicky and Nigel J. Balmer point out the issue unlawful arrest, detention powers under PACE Act and the essence of legal aid more so if the party impoverish and helpless held police. Another scenario is where UK boarder agency decides to deport an immigrant to a country where such a party stands apparent and yet eminent danger of tortured in deported (Pinoceht). Likewise the discussion of Didi. Herman who centres on the role of legal aid in tackling matters of racism, through how legal aid facilitates procedural redress and it is at this juncture is the need to recall the significant contribution such aid plays to contest acts of racial discrimination as epitomised in case of Gypsy. Considering the role of legal aid, then aggrieved applicants from classes of nationals from low financial backing, would seek such aid. If availed, such aid can cover the necessary costs for applications against to conduct and decision of a public authority. Therefore reforms of these cuts will consequently imply that only wealthy immigrants with economic fame those legal costs will be covered, the pitch of cuts in legal aid will expose some migrants to the likelihood of denial or delay in legal representative for court trials. And yet justice delayed is justice denied. And yet in certain cases the applicants might have just grounds to challenge the decisions of the authority. On the other hand Junor. Gordon observes following the decision in that despite the meritorious effects of legal aid, its efficiency has even then been constrained by the uncertainties associated with varied judicial approaches when interpretation article 6. "M v Scottish Legal Aid Board [2011] CSOH 134; 2012 S.L.T. 354, Lord Malcolm had to deal with a dispute between the petitioner and the Scottish Legal Aid Board (SLAB) as to the proper extent of the definition of "assistance by way of representation" A similar view has been observed by D.J. Harris, M. O. Boyle and others in their text , but following the diversity of literature on this concept, that above contentions could be furthered that the issues of judicial uncertainties that have marred legal representation are just other technical but a less worrying concern compared to the expression provisions from Westminster that might compromise the legitimacy of funds for legal aid and therefore weakening the cost supports for even small claims. It not therefore unsurprising that Crifo, Carla, demonstrates the need for even a more compressive approach, to harmonise the acute variances in dealing with small claims costs and legal aid across European states, a relevant aspect of adjective law, costs and hearing although UK has taken a more draconian stance to somehow exclude the small claims from legal aid. Following the above contention, the role of parliamentary sovereignty in UK a typically dualistic state, in this respect the conventions and protocols related to the human rights. In essence in case the impetuous and force of municipal laws of legal aid cuts have in the state tends to have far reaching effects to latter cases in the long run. Even though the Strasbourg decisions in relation legal aid demands might be opposed to its motives and applicability, just like Dickson. Brice, and Specer J.R note, UK courts like they had previously done might still be inclined to recommends strict compliance only to the codified eligibility criteria for all civil cases, even although some literature suggest the functions of legal aid in propelling judicial reviews, appeals complaints a range of civil matters from sports law then equality law to employment law, among others indeed deserves significant credit as respectively expanded by Morgan. Jonathan, Brad R. Roth and Kate. Cook.

In Conclusion: as much as some scholars have appreciated that cut on legal aid are less likely to imply denial of justice. The Legal aid, sentencing Offenders Act has not necessarily abolished aid, but streamlines the criteria upon which such aid must be claimed. In essence its might be worthy appreciating the relationship between the legal claims alongside the financial forces that not only drive policy reforms but hold a centre role in deciding priorities. Unfortunately and yet true these will variably differ from time to time and perhaps from place to place. In essence even with UK, the preferences and model of approaches on legal aid cuts exist between Wales, England, Scotland and Northern Ireland respectively. And Yet the effects of naturalist legal theorises of natural justice, fair hearing, rules against bias coupled with other jurisprudential attributes of human rights assume a relatively static stand, such an assertion more so true in relation to the interface with adjectival laws and interactions with rule of law.

BIBLIOGRAPHIC REFERENCES: Brad R. Roth and Reviewed by Parfitt. Rose, 'Sovereign Equality and Moral Disagreement: Premises of a Pluralist International Legal Order', E.J.I.L. 2012, 23(4), 1184-1189 Case Report: 'McKeown v British Horseracing Authority [2010] EWHC 508 (QB) (QBD),'I.S.L.R. 2010, 3/4, SLR87-151 Craig. Sarah, 'Judicial review: how much is too much? A view of Eba, Cart and MR (Pakistan) from the asylum and immigration perspective,' Edin. L.R. 2012, 16(2), 210-223 Crifo, Carla, 'Europeanisation, harmonisation and unspoken premises: the case of service rules in the Regulation on a European Small Claims Procedure (Reg. No. 861/2007)', C.J.Q. 2011, 30(3), 283-303 Dickson. Brice, 'The record of the House of Lords in Strasbourg',L.Q.R. 2012, 128(Jul), 354-381 Didi. Herman, 'Hopeless cases: race, racism and the "vexatious litigant". J.L.C. Int 2012, 8(1), 27-46 Ed, 'Government proposals for reforming cost awards from Central Funds', H.S. at W. 2010, 16(9), 4 Fisher. Paul, 'After the event: a premium on justice - Hawksford Trustees Jersey Ltd v Stella Global UK Ltd', [2012] EWCA Civ 987,' C.J.Q. 2013, 32(1), 27-32 Hunter. Caroline, 'Funding and costs - is there a way forward?'J.H.L. 2011, 14(4), 75-77 Junor. Gordon, 'Article 6 and legal aid - "access to the courts"?',S.L.T. 2012, 12, 70-73 Kritzer, Herbert. M. 'Fee regimes and the cost of civil justice', C.J.Q. 2009, 28(3), 344-366 Ling. Vicky, 'Family legal aid: does it have a future?' L.I.M. 2011, 11(2), 92-95 Lord Hope of Craighead, 'Scots law seen from south of the border', Edin. L.R. 2012, 16(1), 58-76 McCluskey. David, 'Acquitted defendants` costs: a "constitutional" principle?' Crim. L.R. 2011, 7, 537-546 McIvor. Claire, 'The impact of the Jackson reforms on access to justice in personal injury litigation', C.J.Q. 2011, 30(4), 411-428 Morgan. Jonathan, 'A mare`s nest? The Jockey Club and judicial review of sports governing bodies', L.I.M. 2012, 12(2), 102-109 Pleasence. Pascoe, Kemp. Vicky and Nigel J. Balmer, 'The justice lottery? Police station advice 25 years on from PACE,' Crim. L.R. 2011, 1, 3-18 Rowland J.V. Cole, 'Validating the normative value and legal recognition of the principle of equality of arms in criminal proceedings in Botswana', J.A.L. 2012, 56(1), 68-86 Scott. I.R, '"Success fees" and after-the-event insurance premiums as recoverable costs,' C.J.Q. 2002, 21(Jan), 1-6 Skinner. Paul, 'Case Comment:Freedom of expression, subsidiarity and "no win no fee" agreements: MGN Limited v United Kingdom', E.H.R.L.R. 2011, 3, 329-338 Laws: Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012 c. 10 Administration of Justice Act 1985 c. 61, Sec 40 and 41 Access to Justice Act 1999 c. 22, Sec. 1 (a) and (b) Child Abduction and Custody Act 1985 c. 60 sec. 11 (a) and (b) Case Law R V Visitors to the inns of Court Exp. Calder [1994] QB. 1 [1993], [1993] COD 143 NJL