The Reason For Counsel Was Not Followed, Harm And Countermeasures

In our present framework of legal system, judiciary does not endow any remedy to thedenial of lawyers’ defensive or agent opinions in court trails. There is also no clear provisionto ensure the announcement of lawyers’ defensive or agent opinions in court trails. All theselead to gaps in mobilizing the countering between both parties to ensure the rights of legalparties and judicial balance, which can not fully show the role that lawyers play in the courttrail and thus urge this professional group to seek other ways to exert influence on cases,causing the failed play of the lawyers’ legal skills in the court trail. Today, case parties entrustlegal issues to professional lawyers against the background of more and more rigorous legalrules. However, the parties can not judge the lawyers from their legal skills, leading to thefailure of the law of selecting the superior and eliminating the inferior. Consequently, thelawyers gain more entrusted cases and win lawsuits by approaching judges or seek othernon-legal ways to bribe. In the long run, lawyers rely more on their relationships with judicialsystem instead of improving their own legal knowledge through legitimate ways to influencethe judges. Furthermore, the mass can not judge a capable lawyer. Such a bad circulation issure to impact the integrity of the whole judicial system. However, from the perspective of theprofession of lawyers, the situation can only be improved by offering a fair platform to makethe lawyers win the lawsuit through their legal abilities. The present essay delves into thistopic through three parts:The first part introduces the phenomena of and the reasons for denial of lawyers’ rightopinions during judicial trail. This part quotes some cases with greater social influence andfurther expounds the reasons for the denial of lawyers’ right opinions by judges. The secondpart mainly shows the harm that the denial of the right opinions from lawyers will do. It willcause the deviation from the justice in law and the deficiency in the functions of lawyers’legal action, which will further lead to the social injustice and the withering of lawyers’functions. The third part mainly analyses the functions of legal action through the adoption of lawyers’ right opinions by judges and puts forward how to adopt lawyers’ right opinions. Thispart stresses the author’s suggestion of adding the right of appeal if lawyers’ opinions are notadopted and normalizing the regulating system in judges’ writing court verdict and theirbehaviors.