The Gazette 1993

A P R I L 1993

G A Z E T TE

1 W T Someone To Watch Over Us 1 N V E P 0

the handling of complaints by the executive staff of the Society and sits in adjudication on complaints from the public about issues of professional competence. We endorse the decision of the Council of the Society, taken at its March meeting, to appoint Lay Observers and believe that this move will do much to enhance public confidence in the complaints-handling machinery of the Society and, at the same time, help to improve the image of Society and the profession both of which have had to endure a good deal of unfavourable publicity in recent times. The Society has made it clear that, in moving to open its complaints machinery to public scrutiny, it does not accept that the procedures it has followed are not objectively fair to complainants; it has now endorsed its own judgement in this matter and demonstrated that it has nothing to fear from having There is no doubt, in our view, that the fact that complaints against solicitors are dealt with by a committee in the Society and ultimately adjudicated upon by a tribunal of the High Court, both of which are comprised entirely of practising solicitors, causes the public to question the objectivity of the system. Public confidence in the complaints-handling machinery of the Society is an important matter that affects the public's perception of the profession as a whole and also the credibility of the Law Society as a self-regulatory professional body. The Law Society's proposal is that there would be two lay persons nominated by the Minister for Justice to sit on the Registrar's Committee. These lay persons would not be members of the Committee (until the Solicitors Acts are amended it is not possible to appoint lay persons its procedures subjected to independent assessment.

to be members of the Registrar's Committee) but they would be entitled to receive all the documentation of the Committee, to attend its meetings and to participate fully in its deliberations. Moreover, it is proposed that the Lay Observers would have the right to make recommendations to the Society from time to time on the fairness and adequacy of the Law Society's procedures and also, at least once a year, to make a report in a form suitable for publication on the manner in which the Society has carried out its functions in relation to complaints. (See also page 89.) In essence, therefore, the Lay Observers will fulfil many of the functions that would fall to a legal ombudsman but without the formal trappings of such an office and at a much lower level of cost. We think this is a step in the right direction. There is a need for some public reassurance in this area and the Law Society's initiative achieves the correct balance. The fact that the Lay Observers will be nominated by the Minister for Justice will be a guarantee of their independence from the profession and the proposal that they should have the right to make recommendations and to report on an annual basis will also do much to enhance credibility in performed well in other jurisdictions and ordinary practitioners have no reason to fear this development. Their affairs will continue to be handled with discretion and in total confidence. The Lay Observers will be under a duty, as committee members are, to respect confidentiality in relation to information they obtain in the course of their work. The proposal is a very positive development which it is to be hoped will evoke a sympathetic response from the public and the profession alike. • 85 the system. Lay Observers on complaints committees have

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes is an ancient Latin maxim that neatly encapsulates one of the dilemmas that faces any body charged with acting as guardians of the public in relation to any specific office or function; if the so-called guardians are there to exercise a public duty, who will see to it that they carry out this task properly? Confirming and developing the original charter-based authority of the Law Society, the Oireachtas has seen fit to entrust to the Society the duty and responsibility of dealing with complaints from members of the public against solicitors. Exercising a disciplinary function is, of course, one of the key aspects of being a self-regulatory profession and it is perfectly proper that, when complaints are made against solicitors, issues of professional practice and competence should be adjudicated upon by fellow practitioners. However, in an age of increasing militancy on the part of consumers, including the users of legal services, the fairness and objectivity of complaints-handling machinery, which lacks an independent element, has in other contexts been called into question. The solicitors' profession and the Law Society have not escaped public attention in this regard.

Who, then, should guard the guardians?

The Law Society has now decided that the time is right to appoint Lay

Observers to the Registrar's Committee of the Society to

participate in the decision-making process in relation to complaints against solicitors. The Registrar's Committee, as many readers will be aware, is the internal committee of the Society to which functions of the Council in relation to complaints against solicitors have been delegated. The Committee oversees