Freedom - Justice - Security ?

Freedom - Justice - Security -


Maybe I'm the silly ignorant one. Call me stupid if you like.
All my legal professional life I have done the utmost to satify
my clients' interests. I've never had clientcomplaints. To the
contrary, I would say.
My clients became friends, sending me postcards from vacations,
holiday wishes and updating me with their lives. My client's heirs
became, over time, my new clients, Brought cookies for my pets
and sometimes simply called or visited me, just to ask me how I
was doing and to wish me the best. Why ?

Because I gave my life,- not just my professional life - but my
entire life, to fulfilling my childhood dream, the purpose of my
life, to be an advocate in order to help others to obtain their
legitimate legal rights. Why? Because everyone, everybody, has the
right to a dignified life. That means; loving parents, proper
schooling, adequate health services, in order to obtain personal
identification and accomplishments which will enable proper
housing, food and therefore an income for the family, normaly by
means of a job/work. In a place where the Rule of Law is in force
in a country where a Government is ruled by the Trias Politica,
that is to say, where there is a COMPLETE separation of powers.
Judicial, Legislative and Executive (Government&Administration).

After having lived my youth in 4 different continents in more
than reasonable wealth, I started to work in order to pay for my
University studies. I knew perfectly well that money is a need in
order 'to get by', but that money does not create happiness.

Happiness comes from other sources, as long as the primary needs
are covered. For me the inmense success I had in my professional
life would have meant nothing if it weren't for the happiness in
the eyes of my clients winning their cases.

Ofcourse I noticed irregularities, saw things that raised more
questions than answers, and asked myself why certain matters
were not dealt with. Why some people appeared to be 'more equal'
than others before the courts. Why certain clients' interests
were dealt with priority and others shoved under the carpet.

With ample knowledge of history and sociology I was ofcourse
fully aware of the predator instinct that lies in human nature.
But I believed in the Rule of Law of modern society.

Notwithstanding the folkloric/heraldic stories of Templars,
Crusadors, Jesuits, RoundTable and FreeMasonry, I never would
have been able to inmagine their force behind the curtains in
nowadays economies, governments and local public as well as
semipublic administration organs (like advocate, judge and public
prosecutors societies).
How repulsive are some elements of these entities in the nowaday
national, international and world organizations!
Overruling the Rule of Law, by their ever growing cancer.

Does the public not see, nor understand that a shadow government
by secret organizations will only bring about corruption and
dictatorship ?

Does the general public not see that merging Judicial and
Government/administrative powers is everything that the
Trias politica aimed to prevent ?

Does nobody read any history books or is the population to be
dumbed down, by ignorant/false Teachers, Mass Stream Media,
Drugs and Economical Crises, so that NO ONE WILL DARE TO
SAY ANY THING ?

Because if they dare, they will be 'taken out ?

A nice and honrable colleague of mine told me some years ago that
he had to give in to a local secret society, as he had to feed
his wife and children. I ofcourse understood his argument and
bare him no grudge.

But what happens to Freedom, Justice and Security when lawyers,
advocates and barristers, have to enter into these kind of societies
in order to feed themselves and their families ?

You got it ! The end of the Trias Politica. The end of the
Rule of Law. The end of Democracy. The beginning of a New
World Order ruled by men behind the curtains.


Mevr. mr. drª Marian Aletta Does

Unpopular and dysfunctional internet system LexNet for Advocates soon to be replaced by a national Ministery of Justice PlatformSpanish

A the same time that my local Law Society informed that we, advocates, have to adhere

until 15/11 to the LexNet internet system that makes use of their local websites, they also

informed to be aware of a virus in this system.

 

So we are to adhere to a internet communication system for advocates to communicate with
the courts and other legal institutions, - by force and exclusively - named LexNet, which runs
via their local operative systems and at the same time expose our correspondence, legal data
and computers to a posible virus attack that runs through their local system ?

On the 25.10.16 the National Spanish Law Society informed of a new internet communication
system for advocates, provided by a national Ministery of Justice Platform, which will be implemented shortly. The only 15.000 spanish advocates who entered into the LexNet system,
will not loose their contacts, until all is re-routed into this new Ministery of Justice Platform.

Well let's hope that this new national advocacy internet system will function better than LexNet,
and that it will deprive local entities of distortion of the legal internet systems they run, in order
to harrass the so called 'not-collaboratives'.

That is advocates who do NOT collaborate with corruption and dysfunctional Justice at a local
level. So now we only have to wait for the reaction from the law societies at a local level, who
will see a lot of their power taken away from them.

High time I would say the national spanish government starts intervening with the excessive corruption in the Justice system at local level. Let them please start opening some windows,
because the stench is killing !! Not just the not-collaborative advocates, but the entire society.

When Judges and Prosecutors are handpicked, and paid by the local governments, in Spain
called Comunidades Autonomas, then ONLY the advocates are in a positition to protect the legitimate interests of the citizens.

Which may or may not be the same interests that the politicians at local level may have in mind.
Nor what may be the 'politically correct' opinión of local law societies.

Therefore a NATIONAL INTERNET SYSTEM FOR ADVOCATES VIA A PLATFORM
FROM THE NATIONAL MINISTERY OF JUSTICE WOULD ERADICATE A LOT OF CORRUPTION. High time !!

http://www.abogacia.es/2016/10/25/lexnet-abogacia-inicia-un-proceso-de-transicion-hacia-la-plataforma-del-ministerio-de-justicia/
Lexnet Abogacía inicia un proceso de transición hacia la plataforma del Ministerio de Justicia
25 octubre, 2016

• El Pleno del Consejo General de la Abogacía Española celebrado el viernes 21 de octubre redefine su estrategia en materia tecnológica
• Los 15.000 abogados que diariamente utilizan Lexnet Abogacía podrán seguir utilizando esta plataforma durante el proceso transitorio

El Pleno del Consejo General de la Abogacía Española, celebrado el pasado viernes 21 de octubre, acordó redefinir su estrategia tecnológica que entre otras cosas implica la transición de Lexnet Abogacía hacia la plataforma del Ministerio de Justicia.
La Abogacía ha asumido su responsabilidad como actor fundamental de la Justicia y, fiel a su compromiso de modernización, desarrolló Lexnet Abogacía para ayudar a los letrados en su adaptación a la justicia digital.
Tras un año de funcionamiento con los nuevos requisitos, la Abogacía ha adoptado esta decisión al considerar que es el momento oportuno para lograr mayor eficiencia y eficacia en las comunicaciones electrónicas con los juzgados y tribunales.
El Pleno de la Abogacía ha valorado, entre otras cuestiones, que la homologación por el Ministerio de Justicia de las nuevas funcionalidades de Lexnet Abogacía se produce entre tres y seis meses después de haber sido diseñadas y aplicadas por el propio Ministerio, generando así ineficiencias y un elevado coste operativo en esta herramienta tecnológica. Esto ha provocado que se tuviera que remitir a los usuarios a utilizar la plataforma del Ministerio de Justicia cada vez que éste lanza una nueva funcionalidad y que muchos abogados necesitaran utilizar dos aplicaciones distintas para su comunicación con los juzgados.
Se inicia ahora un proceso de negociación con el Ministerio de Justicia para planificar y garantizar la transición de un sistema a otro. En este periodo, las decenas de miles de abogados que utilizan Lexnet Abogacía –con una media de 15.000 cada día- podrán seguir utilizando esta plataforma, que en ningún caso se desconectará hasta que este proceso finalice en los próximos meses.
Desde ese momento, el Ministerio de Justicia garantizará el funcionamiento y soporte del servicio para todos los profesionales de la Abogacía tal y como establece la Ley 18/2011 reguladora del uso de las tecnologías de la información y la comunicación en la Administración de Justicia

 

La presidenta de la Abogacía participa en un coloquio sobre corrupción e independencia judicial

La presidenta del Consejo de la Abogacía Española, Victoria Ortega, participará el 19 de abril en un coloquio sobre corrupción e independencia judicial, en el que también intervendrán el juez de la Audiencia Nacional Eloy Velasco, que instruye, entre otros, el ‘caso Púnica’, el presidente de la Agrupación de Jóvenes Abogados de Madrid, Juan Ospina; y el magistrado y secretario general de la Plataforma Cívica por la Independencia Judicial Jesús Villegas.
La conferencia, organizada por el Club Siglo XXI y la Agrupación de Jóvenes Abogados de Madrid (AJA-Madrid), tendrá lugar a las 20.00 horas en la sede del Club XXI, donde se debatirá sobre la necesidad de acometer una reforma estructural en el sistema judicial y la división de poderes en España.
La Agrupación de Jóvenes Abogados de Madrid ha informado de que se abrirá un turno de preguntas tras las intervenciones y que la asistencia es abierta, si bien es necesario confirmar la misma en el correo electrónico secretaria@clubsigloxxi.es.


http://www.abogacia.es/2016/04/07/la-presidenta-de-la-abogacia-participa-en-el-club-siglo-xxi-en-un-coloquio-sobre-corrupcion-e-independencia-judicial/

Human Rights

With the European Union in social and economical turmoil, -

not being clear which one of these disorders created the other,

nor invoking respective responsabilities, hidden purposes or

agenda's - it may provide some relief to have a look at human rights.

The UN - Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 1948,

see here below, ofcourse immediately springs to mind, but there

are others, like for instance the Geneva Conventions. The

Geneva Protocol (which had little efect) and the Convention

relating to the status of Refugees.

 

What is it with humans that their rights need to be protected

against violation of these rights by other humans ? These

 'human rights' charters aim to protect human against acts

inflicted by humans upon humans, in most every possible

manner that one can imagine. So we address the national

and international courts for protection of human rights.

 

Some even allege, as a cover up of covert operations in order

to deal with the corruption and power games within the courts.

Ofcourse we believe in the impartiality of the courts, of the
judges, of  the prosecutors and respective advocates, defending
the legitimate rights of their clients.

 

I still have faith in the course of due process and dilligence of
law applied within the courts, even bearing in mind in mind the
affluence of corruption and power games between the good, the
bad and the ugly.

 

As who is who remains to be established, as well as that one

should not forget that beauty  (Justice ?) is in the eye of the
beholder.

Who then decides what is good, adecuate or wrong? And
from which perspective ? Based on what law, and which morals
and principles ?

 

Apart from the hereabove cited material criteria there also are
formal criteria that is procedural rules and principles. Better
said, the tecnicalities of the legalities.

What to be said about excessive procedural court taxes, which
make it impossible for most citizens to introduce or even to
contest a court procedure.

And what about the constitutional, international, protection of the
judiciary, when their professional national societies do not protect
them ? Last but not least; what are the consequences of the
court sentence ? How is this implemented and by whom?

But  that's a different story all together.

 

 

UNITED NATIONS DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS

 

Preamble

Whereas recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world,
Whereas disregard and contempt for human rights have resulted in barbarous acts which have outraged the conscience of mankind, and the advent of a world in which human beings shall enjoy freedom of speech and belief and freedom from fear and want has been proclaimed as the highest aspiration of the common people,
Whereas it is essential, if man is not to be compelled to have recourse, as a last resort, to rebellion against tyranny and oppression, that human rights should be protected by the rule of law,
Whereas it is essential to promote the development of friendly relations between nations,
Whereas the peoples of the United Nations have in the Charter reaffirmed their faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person and in the equal rights of men and women and have determined to promote social progress and better standards of life in larger freedom,
Whereas Member States have pledged themselves to achieve, in co-operation with the United Nations, the promotion of universal respect for and observance of human rights and fundamental freedoms,
Whereas a common understanding of these rights and freedoms is of the greatest importance for the full realization of this pledge,
Now, Therefore THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY proclaims THIS UNIVERSAL DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS as a common standard of achievement for all peoples and all nations, to the end that every individual and every organ of society, keeping this Declaration constantly in mind, shall strive by teaching and education to promote respect for these rights and freedoms and by progressive measures, national and international, to secure their universal and effective recognition and observance, both among the peoples of Member States themselves and among the peoples of territories under their jurisdiction.

Article 1.
 

All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.

Article 2.
 

Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status. Furthermore, no distinction shall be made on the basis of the political, jurisdictional or international status of the country or territory to which a person belongs, whether it be independent, trust, non-self-governing or under any other limitation of sovereignty.

Article 3.
 

Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person.

Article 4.
 

No one shall be held in slavery or servitude; slavery and the slave trade shall be prohibited in all their forms.

Article 5.
 

No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.

Article 6.
 

Everyone has the right to recognition everywhere as a person before the law.

Article 7.
 

All are equal before the law and are entitled without any discrimination to equal protection of the law. All are entitled to equal protection against any discrimination in violation of this Declaration and against any incitement to such discrimination.

Article 8.
 

Everyone has the right to an effective remedy by the competent national tribunals for acts violating the fundamental rights granted him by the constitution or by law.

Article 9.
 

No one shall be subjected to arbitrary arrest, detention or exile.

Article 10.
 

Everyone is entitled in full equality to a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal, in the determination of his rights and obligations and of any criminal charge against him.

Article 11.
 

(1) Everyone charged with a penal offence has the right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law in a public trial at which he has had all the guarantees necessary for his defence.
(2) No one shall be held guilty of any penal offence on account of any act or omission which did not constitute a penal offence, under national or international law, at the time when it was committed. Nor shall a heavier penalty be imposed than the one that was applicable at the time the penal offence was committed.

Article 12.
 

No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honour and reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks.

Article 13.
 

(1) Everyone has the right to freedom of movement and residence within the borders of each state.
(2) Everyone has the right to leave any country, including his own, and to return to his country.

Article 14.
 

(1) Everyone has the right to seek and to enjoy in other countries asylum from persecution.
(2) This right may not be invoked in the case of prosecutions genuinely arising from non-political crimes or from acts contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.

Article 15.
 

(1) Everyone has the right to a nationality.
(2) No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his nationality nor denied the right to change his nationality.

Article 16.
 

(1) Men and women of full age, without any limitation due to race, nationality or religion, have the right to marry and to found a family. They are entitled to equal rights as to marriage, during marriage and at its dissolution.
(2) Marriage shall be entered into only with the free and full consent of the intending spouses.
(3) The family is the natural and fundamental group unit of society and is entitled to protection by society and the State.

Article 17.
 

(1) Everyone has the right to own property alone as well as in association with others.
(2) No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his property.

Article 18.
 

Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance.

Article 19.
 

Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.

Article 20.
 

(1) Everyone has the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and association.
(2) No one may be compelled to belong to an association.

Article 21.
 

(1) Everyone has the right to take part in the government of his country, directly or through freely chosen representatives.
(2) Everyone has the right of equal access to public service in his country.
(3) The will of the people shall be the basis of the authority of government; this will shall be expressed in periodic and genuine elections which shall be by universal and equal suffrage and shall be held by secret vote or by equivalent free voting procedures.

Article 22.
 

Everyone, as a member of society, has the right to social security and is entitled to realization, through national effort and international co-operation and in accordance with the organization and resources of each State, of the economic, social and cultural rights indispensable for his dignity and the free development of his personality.

Article 23.
 

(1) Everyone has the right to work, to free choice of employment, to just and favourable conditions of work and to protection against unemployment.
(2) Everyone, without any discrimination, has the right to equal pay for equal work.
(3) Everyone who works has the right to just and favourable remuneration ensuring for himself and his family an existence worthy of human dignity, and supplemented, if necessary, by other means of social protection.
(4) Everyone has the right to form and to join trade unions for the protection of his interests.

Article 24.
 

Everyone has the right to rest and leisure, including reasonable limitation of working hours and periodic holidays with pay.

Article 25.
 

(1) Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control.
(2) Motherhood and childhood are entitled to special care and assistance. All children, whether born in or out of wedlock, shall enjoy the same social protection.

Article 26.
 

(1) Everyone has the right to education. Education shall be free, at least in the elementary and fundamental stages. Elementary education shall be compulsory. Technical and professional education shall be made generally available and higher education shall be equally accessible to all on the basis of merit.
(2) Education shall be directed to the full development of the human personality and to the strengthening of respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms. It shall promote understanding, tolerance and friendship among all nations, racial or religious groups, and shall further the activities of the United Nations for the maintenance of peace.
(3) Parents have a prior right to choose the kind of education that shall be given to their children.

Article 27.
 

(1) Everyone has the right freely to participate in the cultural life of the community, to enjoy the arts and to share in scientific advancement and its benefits.
(2) Everyone has the right to the protection of the moral and material interests resulting from any scientific, literary or artistic production of which he is the author.

Article 28.
 

Everyone is entitled to a social and international order in which the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration can be fully realized.

Article 29.
 

(1) Everyone has duties to the community in which alone the free and full development of his personality is possible.
(2) In the exercise of his rights and freedoms, everyone shall be subject only to such limitations as are determined by law solely for the purpose of securing due recognition and respect for the rights and freedoms of others and of meeting the just requirements of morality, public order and the general welfare in a democratic society.
(3) These rights and freedoms may in no case be exercised contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.

Article 30.
 

Nothing in this Declaration may be interpreted as implying for any State, group or person any right to engage in any activity or to perform any act aimed at the destruction of any of the rights and freedoms set forth herein.

 

 

Art. 50 Lisbon Treaty - Withdrawal from the European Union legalities

Art. 50 Lisbon Treaty -  Withdrawal from the European Union legalities

"Any Member State may decide to withdraw from the Union in accordance with its own
constitutional requirements."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Withdrawal_from_the_European_Union
This foresees in a agreed withdrawal agreement or a unilateral withdrawal.
As some see it, this would be decided by a qualified majority to be defined in accordance
with Article 238(3)(b) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.
See http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:12012E/TXT

The Treaty of Lisbon introduced an exit clause for members who wish to withdraw from
the Union. Under TEU Article 50, a Member State would notify the European Council of
its intention to exit the Union and a withdrawal agreement would be negotiated between
the Union and that State.

However it does include in it a strong implication of a unilateral right to withdraw. This is
through the fact the state would decide "in accordance with its own constitutional requirements"
and that the end of the treaties' application in said state is not dependent on any agreement
being reached (it would occur after two years regardless).

Lisbon Treaty Article 50
1. Any Member State may decide to withdraw from the Union in accordance with its own
constitutional requirements.
2. A Member State which decides to withdraw shall notify the European Council of its intention.
In the light of the guidelines provided by the European Council, the Union shall negotiate and
conclude an agreement with that State, setting out the arrangements for its withdrawal, taking
account of the framework for its future relationship with the Union. That agreement shall be
negotiated in accordance with Article 218(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European
Union. It shall be concluded on behalf of the Union by the Council, acting by a qualified majority
after obtaining the consent of the European Parliament. (Unless I am mistaken, not all
countries European Member States have an equal number of votes, but this is amongst other
factors related to the population in a country).
3. The Treaties shall cease to apply to the State in question from the date of entry into force of
the withdrawal agreement or, failing that, two years after the notification referred to in paragraph
2, unless the European Council, in agreement with the Member State concerned, unanimously
decides to extend this period.
4. For the purposes of paragraphs 2 and 3, the member of the European Council or of the
Council representing the withdrawing Member State shall not participate in the discussions of
the European Council or Council or in decisions concerning it. A qualified majority shall be defined
in accordance with Article 238(3)(b) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.
5. If a State which has withdrawn from the Union asks to rejoin, its request shall be subject to
the procedure referred to in Article 49.

Art. 238.3   former (ex Article 205(1) and (2), TEC (Treaty European Constitution.)
3. As from 1 November 2014 and subject to the provisions laid down in the Protocol on transitional
provisions, in cases where, under the Treaties, not all the members of the Council participate in voting, a qualified majority shall be defined as follows:

(a) A qualified majority shall be defined as at least 55 % of the members of the Council representing
the participating Member States, comprising at least 65 % of the population of these States.

A blocking minority must include at least the minimum number of Council members representing more than 35 % of the population of the participating Member States, plus one member, failing
which the qualified majority shall be deemed attained;

(b) By way of derogation from point (a), where the Council does not act on a proposal from the
Commissionor from the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, the qualified majority shall be defined as at least 72 % of the members of the Council representing the participating Member States, comprising at least 65 % of the population of these States.

4. Abstentions by Members present in person or represented shall not prevent the adoption by the
Council of acts which require unanimity.

The Treaty of the European Constitution  TCE
The Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe was signed in Rome on 29 October 2004 by 53
senior politicalfigures from the 25 member states of the European Union. In most cases heads of
state designated plenipotentiaries to sign the treaty, but some presidents also signed on behalf of
states which were republics.

On 12 January 2005 the European Parliament voted a legally non-binding resolution in support of
the Constitution by 500 votes in favour to 137 votes against, with 40 abstentions.
Notwithstanding the rejection in France and the Netherlands, Luxembourg held a referendum on
10 July 2005 approving the Constitution by 57% to 43%. It was the last referendum to be held on
theConstitution as all of the other member states that had proposed to hold referendums cancelled
them. Without previously consulting their respective citizens !

A new clause in the TCE provided for the unilateral withdrawal of any member state from the Union
(clause I-60). Under this clause, when a country notifies the Council of its intent to withdraw, a settlement is agreed in the Council with the consent of Parliament. If negotiations are not agreed within two years, the country leaves anyway. An identical provision was subsequently inserted into the treaties by the Lisbon Treaty

Although the Lisbon Treaty, was itself drafted behind closed doors, it adopted the amendment
procedures proposed by the Constitution TCE

http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:12012E/TXT
http://www.lisbon-treaty.org/wcm/the-lisbon-treaty/treaty-on-european-union-and-comments/title-6-final-provisions/137-article-50.html

CCBE - Professional Code of Conduct for Advocates - I

Dear  Readers,  Dear Colleagues,

Hereunder a copy of the CCBE Code of Conduct for Advocates.
I would ask you kindly to read the text. During the following weeks I will go further into
these stipulations.

Mevr. mr. drª Marian Aletta Does
Abogada - Lic. em Direito - Dutch jurist


Code of Conduct for European Lawyers
1. Preamble
2. General principles
2.1. Independence
2.2. Trust and Personal Integrity
2.3. Confidentiality
2.4. Respect for the Rules of Other Bars and Law Societies
2.5. Incompatible Occupations
2.6. Personal Publicity
2.7. The Client’s Interest
2.8. Limitation of Lawyer’s Liability towards the Client
3. Relations with clients
4. Relations with the courts
5. Relations between lawyers
1. Preamble
1.1. The Function of the Lawyer in Society
In a society founded on respect for the rule of law the lawyer fulfils a special role. The lawyer’s duties do not begin and end with the faithful performance of what he or she is instructed to do so far as the law permits. A lawyer must serve the interests of justice as well as those whose rights and liberties he or she is trusted to assert and defend and it is the lawyer’s duty not only to plead the client’s cause but to be the client’s adviser. Respect for the lawyer’s professional function is an essential condition for the rule of law and democracy in society.
 A lawyer’s function therefore lays on him or her a variety of legal and moral obligations (sometimes appearing to be in conflict with each other) towards:
-         the client;
-         the courts and other authorities before whom the lawyer pleads the client’s cause or acts on the client’s behalf;
-         the legal profession in general and each fellow member of it in particular;
-         the public for whom the existence of a free and independent profession, bound together by respect for rules made by the profession itself, is an essential means of safeguarding human rights in face of the power of the state and other interests in society.
1.2. The Nature of Rules of Professional Conduct
1.2.1.        Rules of professional conduct are designed through their willing acceptance by those to whom they apply to ensure the proper performance by the lawyer of a function which is recognised as essential in all civilised societies. The failure of the lawyer to observe these rules may result in disciplinary sanctions.
1.2.2.        The particular rules of each Bar or Law Society arise from its own traditions. They are adapted to the organisation and sphere of activity of the profession in the Member State concerned and to its judicial and administrative procedures and to its national legislation. It is neither possible nor desirable that they should be taken out of their context nor that an attempt should be made to give general application to rules which are inherently incapable of such application.
The particular rules of each Bar and Law Society nevertheless are based on the same values and in most cases demonstrate a common foundation.
1.3. The Purpose of the Code
1.3.1.        The continued integration of the European Union and European Economic Area and the increasing frequency of the cross-border activities of lawyers within the European Economic Area have made necessary in the public interest the statement of common rules which apply to all lawyers from the European Economic Area whatever Bar or Law Society they belong to in relation to their cross-border practice. A particular purpose of the statement of those rules is to mitigate the difficulties which result from the application of “double deontology”, notably as set out in Articles 4 and 7.2 of Directive 77/249/EEC and Articles 6 and 7 of Directive 98/5/EC.
1.3.2.        The organisations representing the legal profession through the CCBE propose that the rules codified in the following articles:
-         be recognised at the present time as the expression of a consensus of all the Bars and Law Societies of the European Union and European Economic Area;
-         be adopted as enforceable rules as soon as possible in accordance with national or EEA procedures in relation to the cross-border activities of the lawyer in the European Union and European Economic Area;
-         be taken into account in all revisions of national rules of deontology or professional practice with a view to their progressive harmonisation.
They further express the wish that the national rules of deontology or professional practice be interpreted and applied whenever possible in a way consistent with the rules in this Code.
After the rules in this Code have been adopted as enforceable rules in relation to a lawyer’s cross-border activities the lawyer will remain bound to observe the rules of the Bar or Law Society to which he or she belongs to the extent that they are consistent with the rules in this Code.
1.4. Field of Application Ratione Personae
This Code shall apply to lawyers as they are defined by Directive 77/249/EEC and by Directive 98/5/EC and to lawyers of the Associate and Observer Members of the CCBE.
1.5. Field of Application Ratione Materiae
Without prejudice to the pursuit of a progressive harmonisation of rules of deontology or professional practice which apply only internally within a Member State, the following rules shall apply to the cross-border activities of the lawyer within the European Union and the European Economic Area. Cross-border activities shall mean:
 (a) all professional contacts with lawyers of Member States other than the lawyer’s own;
 (b) the professional activities of the lawyer in a Member State other than his or her own, whether or not the lawyer is physically present in that Member State.
1.6. Definitions
In this Code:
 “Member State” means a member state of the European Union or any other state whose legal profession is included in Article 1.4.
 “Home Member State” means the Member State where the lawyer acquired the right to bear his or her professional title.
 “Host Member State” means any other Member State where the lawyer carries on cross-border activities.
 “Competent Authority” means the professional organisation(s) or authority(ies) of the Member State concerned responsible for the laying down of rules of professional conduct and the administration of discipline of lawyers.
 “Directive 77/249/EEC” means Council Directive 77/249/EEC of 22 March 1977 to facilitate the effective exercise by lawyers of freedom to provide services.
 “Directive 98/5/EC” means Directive 98/5/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 February 1998 to facilitate practice of the profession of lawyer on a permanent basis in a Member State other than that in which the qualification was obtained.
2. General principles
2.1. Independence
2.1.1.        The many duties to which a lawyer is subject require the lawyer’s absolute independence, free from all other influence, especially such as may arise from his or her personal interests or external pressure. Such independence is as necessary to trust in the process of justice as the impartiality of the judge. A lawyer must therefore avoid any impairment of his or her independence and be careful not to compromise his or her professional standards in order to please the client, the court or third parties.
2.1.2.        This independence is necessary in non-contentious matters as well as in litigation. Advice given by a lawyer to the client has no value if the lawyer gives it only to ingratiate him- or herself, to serve his or her personal interests or in response to outside pressure.
2.2. Trust and Personal Integrity
Relationships of trust can only exist if a lawyer’s personal honour, honesty and integrity are beyond doubt. For the lawyer these traditional virtues are professional obligations.
2.3. Confidentiality
2.3.1        It is of the essence of a lawyer’s function that the lawyer should be told by his or her client things which the client would not tell to others, and that the lawyer should be the recipient of other information on a basis of confidence. Without the certainty of confidentiality there cannot be trust. Confidentiality is therefore a primary and fundamental right and duty of the lawyer.
The lawyer’s obligation of confidentiality serves the interest of the administration of justice as well as the interest of the client. It is therefore entitled to special protection by the State.
2.3.2.        A lawyer shall respect the confidentiality of all information that becomes known to the lawyer in the course of his or her professional activity.
2.3.3.        The obligation of confidentiality is not limited in time.
2.3.4.        A lawyer shall require his or her associates and staff and anyone engaged by him or her in the course of providing professional services to observe the same obligation of confidentiality.
2.4. Respect for the Rules of Other Bars and Law Societies
When practising cross-border, a lawyer from another Member State may be bound to comply with the professional rules of the Host Member State. Lawyers have a duty to inform themselves as to the rules which will affect them in the performance of any particular activity.
 Member organisations of the CCBE are obliged to deposit their codes of conduct at the Secretariat of the CCBE so that any lawyer can get hold of the copy of the current code from the Secretariat.
2.5. Incompatible Occupations
2.5.1.        In order to perform his or her functions with due independence and in a manner which is consistent with his or her duty to participate in the administration of justice a lawyer may be prohibited from undertaking certain occupations.
 2.5.2.        A lawyer who acts in the representation or the defence of a client in legal proceedings or before any public authorities in a Host Member State shall there observe the rules regarding incompatible occupations as they are applied to lawyers of the Host Member State.
 2.5.3.        A lawyer established in a Host Member State in which he or she wishes to participate directly in commercial or other activities not connected with the practice of the law shall respect the rules regarding forbidden or incompatible occupations as they are applied to lawyers of that Member State.
2.6. Personal Publicity
2.6.1.        A lawyer is entitled to inform the public about his or her services provided that the information is accurate and not misleading, and respectful of the obligation of confidentiality and other core values of the profession.
 2.6.2.        Personal publicity by a lawyer in any form of media such as by press, radio, television, by electronic commercial communications or otherwise is permitted to the extent it complies with the requirements of 2.6.1.
2.7. The Client’s Interest
Subject to due observance of all rules of law and professional conduct, a lawyer must always act in the best interests of the client and must put those interests before the lawyer’s own interests or those of fellow members of the legal profession.

2.8. Limitation of Lawyer’s Liability towards the Client
To the extent permitted by the law of the Home Member State and the Host Member State, the lawyer may limit his or her liabilities towards the client in accordance with the professional rules to which the lawyer is subject.
3. Relations with clients
3.1. Acceptance and Termination of Instructions
3.1.1.        A lawyer shall not handle a case for a party except on that party’s instructions. The lawyer may, however, act in a case in which he or she has been instructed by another lawyer acting for the party or where the case has been assigned to him or her by a competent body.
 The lawyer should make reasonable efforts to ascertain the identity, competence and authority of the person or body who instructs him or her when the specific circumstances show that the identity, competence and authority are uncertain.
 3.1.2.        A lawyer shall advise and represent the client promptly, conscientiously and diligently. The lawyer shall undertake personal responsibility for the discharge of the client’s instructions and shall keep the client informed as to the progress of the matter with which the lawyer has been entrusted.
 3.1.3.        A lawyer shall not handle a matter which the lawyer knows or ought to know he or she is not competent to handle, without cooperating with a lawyer who is competent to handle it.
 A lawyer shall not accept instructions unless he or she can discharge those instructions promptly having regard to the pressure of other work.
 3.1.4.        A lawyer shall not be entitled to exercise his or her right to withdraw from a case in such a way or in such circumstances that the client may be unable to find other legal assistance in time to prevent prejudice being suffered by the client.
3.2. Conflict of Interest
3.2.1.        A lawyer may not advise, represent or act on behalf of two or more clients in the same matter if there is a conflict, or a significant risk of a conflict, between the interests of those clients.
 3.2.2.        A lawyer must cease to act for both or all of the clients concerned when a conflict of interests arises between those clients and also whenever there is a risk of a breach of confidence or where the lawyer’s independence may be impaired.
 3.2.3.        A lawyer must also refrain from acting for a new client if there is a risk of breach of a confidence entrusted to the lawyer by a former client or if the knowledge which the lawyer possesses of the affairs of the former client would give an undue advantage to the new client.
 3.2.4.        Where lawyers are practising in association, paragraphs 3.2.1 to 3.2.3 above shall apply to the association and all its members.
3.3. Pactum de Quota Litis
3.3.1.        A lawyer shall not be entitled to make a pactum de quota litis.
 3.3.2.        By “pactum de quota litis” is meant an agreement between a lawyer and the client entered into prior to final conclusion of a matter to which the client is a party, by virtue of which the client undertakes to pay the lawyer a share of the result regardless of whether this is represented by a sum of money or by any other benefit achieved by the client upon the conclusion of the matter.
 3.3.3.        “Pactum de quota litis” does not include an agreement that fees be charged in proportion to the value of a matter handled by the lawyer if this is in accordance with an officially approved fee scale or under the control of the Competent Authority having jurisdiction over the lawyer.
3.4. Regulation of Fees A fee charged by a lawyer shall be fully disclosed to the client, shall be fair and reasonable, and shall comply with the law and professional rules to which the lawyer is subject.
3.5. Payment on Account.
If a lawyer requires a payment on account of his or her fees and/or disbursements such payment should not exceed a reasonable estimate of the fees and probable disbursements involved.
 Failing such payment, a lawyer may withdraw from the case or refuse to handle it, but subject always to paragraph 3.1.4 above.
3.6. Fee Sharing with Non-Lawyers
3.6.1.        A lawyer may not share his or her fees with a person who is not a lawyer except where an association between the lawyer and the other person is permitted by the laws and the professional rules to which the lawyer is subject.
3.6.2.        The provisions of 3.6.1 above shall not preclude a lawyer from paying a fee, commission or other compensation to a deceased lawyer’s heirs or to a retired lawyer in respect of taking over the deceased or retired lawyer’s practice.
3.7. Cost of Litigation and Availability of Legal Aid
3.7.1.        The lawyer should at all times strive to achieve the most cost-effective resolution of the client’s dispute and should advise the client at appropriate stages as to the desirability of attempting a settlement and/or a reference to alternative dispute resolution.
3.7.2.        A lawyer shall inform the client of the availability of legal aid where applicable.
3.8. Client Funds
3.8.1.        Lawyers who come into possession of funds on behalf of their clients or third parties (hereinafter called “client funds”) have to deposit such money into an account of a bank or similar institution subject to supervision by a public authority (hereinafter called a “client account”). A client account shall be separate from any other account of the lawyer. All client funds received by a lawyer should be deposited into such an account unless the owner of such funds agrees that the funds should be dealt with otherwise.
3.8.2.        The lawyer shall maintain full and accurate records showing all the lawyer’s dealings with client funds and distinguishing client funds from other funds held by the lawyer. Records may have to be kept for a certain period of time according to national rules.
3.8.3.        A client account cannot be in debit except in exceptional circumstances as expressly permitted in national rules or due to bank charges, which cannot be influenced by the lawyer. Such an account cannot be given as a guarantee or be used as a security for any reason. There shall not be any set-off or merger between a client account and any other bank account, nor shall the client funds in a client account be available to defray money owed by the lawyer to the bank.
3.8.4.        Client funds shall be transferred to the owners of such funds in the shortest period of time or under such conditions as are authorised by them.
3.8.5.        The lawyer cannot transfer funds from a client account into the lawyer’s own account for payment of fees without informing the client in writing.
3.8.6.        The Competent Authorities in Member States shall have the power to verify and examine any document regarding client funds, whilst respecting the confidentiality or legal professional privilege to which it may be subject.3.9. Professional Indemnity Insurance
3.9.1.        Lawyers shall be insured against civil legal liability arising out of their legal practice to an extent which is reasonable having regard to the nature and extent of the risks incurred by their professional activities.
3.9.2.        Should this prove impossible, the lawyer must inform the client of this situation and its consequences.
4. Relations with the courts
4.1. Rules of Conduct in Court
A lawyer who appears, or takes part in a case, before a court or tribunal must comply with the rules of conduct applied before that court or tribunal. 4.2. Fair Conduct of Proceedings
A lawyer must always have due regard for the fair conduct of proceedings
4.3. Demeanour in Court
A lawyer shall while maintaining due respect and courtesy towards the court defend the interests of the client honourably and fearlessly without regard to the lawyer’s own interests or to any consequences to him- or herself or to any other person.
4.4. False or Misleading Information
A lawyer shall never knowingly give false or misleading information to the court.
4.5. Extension to Arbitrators etc.
The rules governing a lawyer’s relations with the courts apply also to the lawyer’s relations with arbitrators and any other persons exercising judicial or quasi-judicial functions, even on an occasional basis.
5. Relations between lawyers
5.1. Corporate Spirit of the Profession
5.1.1.        The corporate spirit of the profession requires a relationship of trust and co-operation between lawyers for the benefit of their clients and in order to avoid unnecessary litigation and other behaviour harmful to the reputation of the profession. It can, however, never justify setting the interests of the profession against those of the client.
 5.1.2.        A lawyer should recognise all other lawyers of Member States as professional colleagues and act fairly and courteously towards them
5.2. Co-operation among Lawyers of Different Member States
5.2.1.        It is the duty of a lawyer who is approached by a colleague from another Member State not to accept instructions in a matter which the lawyer is not competent to undertake. The lawyer should in such case be prepared to help that colleague to obtain the information necessary to enable him or her to instruct a lawyer who is capable of providing the service asked for.
 5.2.2.        Where a lawyer of a Member State co-operates with a lawyer from another Member State, both have a general duty to take into account the differences which may exist between their respective legal systems and the professional organisations, competences and obligations of lawyers in the Member States concerned.
5.3. Correspondence between Lawyers
5.3.1.        If a lawyer intends to send communications to a lawyer in another Member State, which the sender wishes to remain confidential or without prejudice he or she should clearly express this intention prior to communicating the first of the documents.
 5.3.2.        If the prospective recipient of the communications is unable to ensure their status as confidential or without prejudice he or she should inform the sender accordingly without delay.
5.4. Referral Fees
5.4.1.        A lawyer may not demand or accept from another lawyer or any other person a fee, commission or any other compensation for referring or recommending the lawyer to a client.
 5.4.2.        A lawyer may not pay anyone a fee, commission or any other compensation as a consideration for referring a client to him- or herself.
5.5. Communication with Opposing Parties
A lawyer shall not communicate about a particular case or matter directly with any person whom he or she knows to be represented or advised in the case or matter by another lawyer, without the consent of that other lawyer (and shall keep the other lawyer informed of any such communications).
5.6. (Deleted by decision of the Plenary Session in Dublin on 6 December 2002)
5.7. Responsibility for Fees
In professional relations between members of Bars of different Member States, where a lawyer does not confine him- or herself to recommending another lawyer or introducing that other lawyer to the client but instead him- or herself entrusts a correspondent with a particular matter or seeks the correspondent’s advice, the instructing lawyer is personally bound, even if the client is insolvent, to pay the fees, costs and outlays which are due to the foreign correspondent. The lawyers concerned may, however, at the outset of the relationship between them make special arrangements on this matter. Further, the instructing lawyer may at any time limit his or her personal responsibility to the amount of the fees, costs and outlays incurred before intimation to the foreign lawyer of the instructing lawyer’s disclaimer of responsibility for the future.
5.8. Continuing Professional Development
Lawyers should maintain and develop their professional knowledge and skills taking proper account of the European dimension of their profession.
5.9. Disputes amongst Lawyers in Different Member States
5.9.1.        If a lawyer considers that a colleague in another Member State has acted in breach of a rule of professional conduct the lawyer shall draw the matter to the attention of that colleague.
5.9.2.        If any personal dispute of a professional nature arises amongst lawyers in different Member States they should if possible first try to settle it in a friendly way. 
5.9.3.        A lawyer shall not commence any form of proceedings against a colleague in another Member State on matters referred to in 5.9.1 or 5.9.2 above without first informing the Bars or Law Societies to which they both belong for the purpose of allowing both Bars or Law Societies concerned an opportunity to assist in reaching a settlement.



  

Justice as a false flag operation banner - EU Freedom, Justice & Security

Internet forms an integral part of today's modern times, and so it is in the
EU-Member State Justice systems. In Spain, since January 2016 this system
under the name of LEXNET is obligatory.

Eradicating paper documents within the courts, which had to be handed to,
and in some cases handled by, Procurators, with all (un)necesarry
consequences, seems to be something of the past.

But this also applies to other departments of the State's administrative powers,
such as civil and commercial registry offices, local tax offices, etc.

A few months later, and eventhoug obligatory, it's factual implementation
leaves somewhat to be desired. And as always with mayor changes, it has it
advantages and disadvantages.

In the old times, - knowing at which hours certain officials would be taking
their coffee break, leaving only one or the other official to handle the incoming
documents -, one at least knew (or with a certainty probability could quess), in
which department the procedure would end up, or remain, - sometimes for
years - at the bottom of the pile.

Leaving the door open to either present, or not present, the procedure or
any of it's documents, during either of the coffee breaks.

With the introduction of internet controlled procedures, both the procurators
and inmense paper files on the desks of the officials are a picture of the past.

Well, paper can be replaced by a cd-rom disk or other data carrying technology,
which do not, necessarily oblige to the use of a closed internet mailing circuit.

But it is certainly a relief for citizens not having to contract and pay both an
advocate (to invoke law) as well as a procurator (to represent them) in order to
defend their rights in a court case. As in principle one's advocate does both.

One way or the other, the system however has been able to introduce a new
type of 'gatekeepers', this time the State appointed administrator (as it is the
States' responsability to administer Justice), responsible for administrating the
received electronic documentation, judging it on basic principles and
realocating it to certain departments or courts.

I'm sure that Richelieu would have been very pleased with these measures,
as it would have made it a lot easier to control musketering officials.

On the other hand, with State controlled administers of Justice, as
gatekeepers of the same, the question then arrises who are those
who in representation of the State, appoint - better said; hand pick -
those Judicial administators?

And what about the lack of separation of Powers within the State,
the trias politicas. Wasn't it the general idea Administrative and Judiciary
would remain separate in order to warrant democracy ?

That is, democracy in the factual sense of the word in representation of
all people, and not administered by a totalitarian 50 + 1, tecnocracy.

The first attempt in Spain, to intoduce an electronic justice system, some 12
years ago failed, as it was completely ignored by all Judiciary, Administrative
and Governmental Entities. Let's see how far Lexnet will make it.

Mevr. mr. drª Marian Aletta Does
Abogada - lic. em direito - dutch lawyer