Meeting of the PASO Qualification Commission

On December 8, 2022, a meeting of the Qualification Commission of the Chamber of Advocates of the Samara Region was held, concluding 2022.

The agenda of the meeting determined six disciplinary proceedings for consideration, one of which was initiated at the request of the court, five - on the complaints of principals.

Five disciplinary proceedings were considered on the merits, one was postponed due to the provision of additional materials by the party.

*****

From the appeal of the judge of the Samara Regional Court in relation to lawyer L., it follows that when the appellate instance considered the materials of the criminal case, the court established that in the court session of the court of first instance, two defendants and one lawyer challenged the judge and the public prosecutor. Lawyer L., who defends the interests of one of the defendants, did not support the position of the principal, saying that she trusts the court, has no challenges, leaves the petition to the discretion of the court. From the appeal of the court, it can be seen that the defendant of lawyer L., pleading guilty to committing the crimes imputed to him, disputes the fact that they were committed by a group of persons by prior conspiracy, while lawyer L. insisted on the full admission of guilt by the defendant, i.e. took a position contrary to the will of the principal, which is contrary to the requirements of paragraphs. 3 p. 4 art. 6 of the Federal Law “On advocacy and advocacy in the Russian Federation” and p.p. 2 p. 1 art. 9 of the Lawyer's Code of Professional Ethics.

These circumstances are confirmed by the appeal ruling of the Samara Regional Court, which overturned the sentence, pointing to the violation of the defendant L.'s right to defense.

Having unanimously considered the presence of a disciplinary offense in the actions of the lawyer, the Commission draws the attention of colleagues to the fact that the requirement of paragraphs. 3 p. 4 art. 6 of the Law on the Bar, containing a prohibition for a lawyer to take a position against the will of the principal, except in cases where the lawyer is convinced that the principal has self-incrimination, is the basis of the defense lawyer's activities. Lawyers should comply with this requirement with all responsibility. A different variant of the defender's behavior is regarded as unskilled and dishonest implementation of professional activities. Violation by a lawyer of the requirements of the legislation on advocacy and the advocacy and the Code of professional ethics of a lawyer, committed intentionally or through gross negligence, entails the application of disciplinary measures provided for by the legislation on advocacy and the advocacy and the Code of professional ethics of a lawyer (clause 1, article 18 of the Code).

*****

It follows from the complaint of citizen E. that two agreements were concluded between her and the Law Office on the provision of legal assistance to her son, citizen E., in a criminal case at the stage of investigation and in court. The direct fulfillment of obligations under the terms of the agreements is assigned to the lawyer P. At the same time, the lawyer did not formalize the transfer of funds to him, the receipts were not issued and the applicant was not transferred, the obligations under the agreement were not fulfilled.

P.'s lawyer submitted explanations to the Commission that do not refute the applicant's arguments.

The commission established the presence of a disciplinary offense in the actions of the lawyer.

*****

A stormy debate was aroused by the disciplinary proceedings initiated on the complaint of citizen S., from which it follows that she entered into an agreement with lawyer L., paid the amount stipulated by the agreement, and hoped for the lawyer's help in initiating a criminal case based on her statement. In fact, no criminal case was opened. Having turned to the lawyer with questions, she received in response the texts of appeals, "containing inadequate statements that cannot be called legal assistance." The complaint, drawn up on behalf of the lawyer and signed by him, contains an excerpt from an appeal addressed to the President of the Russian Federation (the spelling and punctuation of the author are preserved): “I believe that my forced subsequent open appeal to the reception of the President of Russia, due to the lack of effective work on my appeals, with a high probability they will later be perceived as the inaction of the head of the criminal police and will be assessed as a betrayal that contributes to undermining the loss in constitutional justice in the minds of the people, who are secretly served by this bunch of “police chiefs” in the role of clandestine members of the fifth column, whose coordinators are holed up in Washington” . According to the applicant, lawyer L. “took a lot of money” (50,000 rubles) for allegedly conducting a criminal case, which in fact does not exist”.

The qualification commission established the presence in the actions of lawyer L. of a disciplinary offense, expressed in non-compliance with the procedural form of presenting the text and sending the appeal to the wrong body, not endowed with the procedural right to make decisions on protecting the interests of the principal.

*****

From the complaint of citizen Sh. against lawyer Yu.Yu. and lawyer Yu.N. it follows that in October 2019 she entered into agreements with each of them separately for the provision of legal assistance in a criminal case and paid 750 thousand rubles to each of the lawyers. Until November 2019, legal assistance was not provided by lawyers. As the applicant points out: “Since November 2019, the court has held 17 court hearings, of which lawyer Yu.Yu. was absent from six meetings, and Yu.N. – in nine meetings, including the meeting on February 5, 2020, he was partially absent. After the change of composition of the court of first instance, 51 hearings were held, “of which lawyer Yu.Yu. was absent from 42 meetings, including one meeting on 11/08/2021 was partially absent, and lawyer Yu.N. was absent in 34 court sessions, including four sessions and was partially absent”. The applicant points out that “she was completely deprived of the right to a qualified defense” due to the lack of lawyers. In the fall of 2021, the applicant filed a complaint with the Chamber of Lawyers of the Samara Region against the defenders, however, subsequently, “under pressure from lawyers”, the complaint was withdrawn. After the complaint was withdrawn, the lawyers stopped communicating and stopped defending the applicant's interests. The sentence passed by the court of first instance was sent to the lawyers, however, the lawyers, contrary to the will of the principal and the subject of the agreement, did not participate in the preparation of the appeal, did not appear at the court session of the court of appeal.

The Commission unanimously came to the conclusion that the actions of the lawyers contained elements of a disciplinary offense, pointing out that the lawyers grossly violated the norms of the Federal Law “On Advocacy and the Bar in the Russian Federation”, the Code of Professional Ethics of a Lawyer and the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation, such actions are unacceptable, since they undermine respect for activities of a lawyer and the bar as a whole, discredit a lawyer as a participant in legal proceedings, and cause significant harm to the authority of the bar as an institution of civil society.

*****

Chairman of the Commission A.V. Kokin summed up the results of joint work in the past year, noted the high level of interaction with representatives of the Department of the Ministry of Justice for the Samara Region, the Arbitration Court of the Samara Region and the Samara Regional Court, the Samara Provincial Duma, and also congratulated colleagues on the upcoming New Year.

PASO Press Center