PASO Council meeting

On March 2, the regular meeting of the Council of the Chamber of Advocates of the Samara Region was held.

One application for renewal, one for termination, and five for suspension of the status of an advocate were considered. The Council regretfully terminated the status of advocate Viktor Vladimirovich Panikar due to his death. Blessed memory to a colleague.

Two advocates notified the Council about changing their membership in the PASO to a bar association of another region. Three law offices were established, one was liquidated. Seven advocates were credited with hours of professional training and professional development. Based on the applications of clients, thirteen advocates were thanked.

The PASO Council received three applications for early removal of disciplinary sanctions. Two of them were satisfied, the third was rejected due to the fact that the warning, which the advocate requested to be removed, was issued to him only a month ago.

Six advocates submitted applications to the Council for inclusion in the SJUP system. The Council granted all but one - filed by a lawyer whose application for early removal of the warning was denied.

The Council reviewed 50 disciplinary proceedings.

Failure to comply with the Standard.

Eight proceedings were initiated against lawyers who failed to comply with the Standard of professional training and professional development for the period up to 31.05.2022. All of them were previously given a period to make up for the missing number of hours, which they did not use. In this regard, disciplinary proceedings were initiated in October 2022. After that, some of the lawyers paid off their debts. Those who did not do so were warned of termination of their status in December 2022. Six lawyers fulfilled the obligation to improve their qualifications only by the beginning of March 2023 - but in the amount that had to be confirmed by May 2022.

Thus, in May of this year, the debt was again formed. The Council issued them warnings about the termination of the status of lawyer.

Two more lawyers did not take any measures to undergo training during the entire year that the disciplinary proceedings lasted. One of them directly stated that he no longer needed the status of lawyer, and contact with the second was lost. The Council terminated the status of these lawyers.

Inspection

Forty-eight proceedings considered by the Council were initiated as a result of the Inspection of the execution by lawyers of the Decision of the PASO Council No. 14-11-08 / SP dated 27.1.2014, within the framework of which lawyers providing subsidized legal assistance were required to submit a dossier. The decision to conduct an inspection was made by the Council on September 29, 2022, sent to lawyers via the Internet-PASO system, published on the PASO website and in the Paso.ru mobile application. The inspection deadline was set until October 10, 2022, but in fact, the dossiers were accepted for another month and a half, while the inspection commission was working, i.e. "until the last latecomer".

Disciplinary proceedings were initiated against lawyers who did not submit a dossier. With respect to two of the forty-eight lawyers, the Qualification Commission issued a conclusion on the need to terminate disciplinary proceedings due to the absence of violations of the legislation on advocacy and the bar in the actions (inactions) of the lawyer. This was due to the lawyers providing evidence that the deadline for submitting the dossier was missed for a valid reason (hospitalization, illness, etc.). The Council agreed with the Commission's conclusion and terminated these proceedings.

The Commission found violations of current regulations in the actions of the remaining forty-six lawyers. The measure of responsibility for them was selected by the Council based on whether such a violation was committed for the first time, or there were previous penalties for failure to provide a dossier, as well as the position of the lawyer himself.

If the lawyer ignores the check more than once, while stating that he does not intend to submit the dossier, since he does not consider it necessary, this is his attorney-client privilege, etc. - there is a deliberate disregard by the lawyer of the norms of the current legislation, the Decision of the PASO Council, the position of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation and judicial practice. In the discussion about the legality of checks of lawyers' dossiers "by appointment" for many years, all the i's have been dotted - both by the bodies of lawyer self-government, and by the courts of general jurisdiction, and by the Determination of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation dated March 27, 2018.

The need for such inspections is determined by the principle of independence of the Bar from the state, enshrined in Article 2 of the Federal Law "On Advocacy and the Bar in the Russian Federation" No. 63-FZ and common sense. If a lawyer receives money for his work, then in all cases the payer has the right to control the quality of the work. If we are talking about budget funds, the "payer" is doubly interested in their effective spending. And delegating the responsibility for quality control to the bodies of the Bar Association is the most consistent with the Federal Law and obviously more organic for the Bar than assigning this responsibility to state bodies. Under such circumstances, the Council assesses systematic "ideological" resistance to inspections as grounds for applying disciplinary measures.

A number of typical violations and misconceptions of lawyers were reflected in an article published on the PASO website based on the results of the inspection, they are always given attention during the PASO webinars.

However, lawyers forget that a dossier must be submitted for each request distributed to them by the Center for Legal Affairs, even if it is a one-time summons to the Samara Regional Court or the Sixth Cassation Court of General Jurisdiction.

In addition, it turns out that not all lawyers correctly understand the right of participants in disciplinary proceedings to give explanations in oral and written form, as provided by the KPEA. Only explanations given during a meeting of the Qualification Commission or the Council of the Chamber are considered oral. All other explanations that the lawyer wishes to provide must be sent in writing. A call to the Chamber is not an oral explanation of the lawyer!

Proceedings against twenty-seven lawyers who committed an offense for the first time were terminated due to insignificance and colleagues retained the right to work in the Center for Legal Affairs. Five lawyers were given warnings, three were given warnings about termination of their status.

Of all the proceedings considered during the meetings of the Council, only three were initiated based on complaints from clients. One of them was terminated due to the corresponding conclusion of the Qualification Commission, and the consideration of two more was postponed at the request of the lawyers.

The PASO Council received an appeal from a citizen with a request to "pay close attention" to the activities of a lawyer who systematically borrows money from both his clients and other citizens, does not return the money, and does not fulfill his obligations to his clients. This was confirmed by an impressive extract from the register of enforcement proceedings. Since the appeal was not received from the client, but from one of the lawyer's creditors, the Council did not consider this a proper reason for initiating disciplinary proceedings. However, the practice of increasing the number of debts for a lawyer cannot be considered acceptable in itself. The CPEA directly prohibits a lawyer from taking on debt obligations to clients. Numerous chronic debts and the need to constantly "run" from creditors are incompatible with the principle enshrined in paragraph 4 of the CPEA, according to which a lawyer must, under all circumstances, maintain the honor and dignity inherent in his profession. In addition, the accumulation of debts may leave the lawyer with no other choice but bankruptcy proceedings, which significantly limits the ability to practice law. An explanation on this matter was given by the Ethics and Standards Commission of the Federal Chamber of Attorneys of the Russian Federation on 04.12.2027.

PASO Press Center