Preserving Human Rights and Upholding the Rule of Law: Defending Legal Freedom in Iraq

Defending the public rights of society.. the responsibility of legal men

Under the pretext of avoiding unrest and misleading, the Iraqi Bar Association requested a few days ago from the Communications and Media Commission a serious administrative order, calling on it to take legal measures against lawyers who appear to express opinions and advice in the media without a "license", which has angered lawyers. It seems that this approach is linked to the opinion of a political party that is waiting to prevent opinions that occupy public opinion about its practices at the political and institutional levels. However, the association confirmed its commitment to two issues: Lawyers may not appear to express their opinions without obtaining a prior "license" from it.. Secondly, if this does not happen: the lawyer will expose himself to legal accountability. However, at the same time, it did not explicitly announce its true intentions behind adopting such a worrying initiative, because it is considered a kind of gagging and confiscation of human rights and freedom of expression guaranteed by the constitution and legal and civil norms. Also, the internal regulations of the association itself emphasize the principle of defending its members.

Scientific and legal analysis related to the tasks of the lawyer and judge as legal men who play pivotal roles in the life of society by ensuring the application of the law and achieving justice. It refers to: the right of the lawyer to defend the rights of individuals and institutions and provide them with legal advice. While the judge interprets the law and settles disputes. These tasks require great moral responsibility and a scientific role in developing legal regulations and promoting social justice. Therefore, under no circumstances may state institutions or a trade union institution prevent the lawyer from performing his moral and humanitarian role in defending the rights of members of society. Such prevention is a clear violation of human rights, the rule of law and justice and leads to the undermining of society.

Restricting lawyers from participating in public discussions and appearing in the media to provide advice on issues affecting the rights of society is a blatant infringement on their rights of expression and weakens their fundamental role in protecting and promoting human rights and social justice. Freedom of expression and participation in public discussions are an integral part of the lawyer's role as an advocate for that societal justice. This right is considered an essential part of human rights guaranteed by international covenants, such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (Article 11) and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (Article 14). Therefore, restricting this freedom can lead to corruption and violation of civil rights of society, which contradicts the basic principles of the rule of law and social justice.

As a link between individuals and state institutions, or working to represent individuals or entities before courts and official and unofficial bodies or appearing in the media to provide advice. The lawyer seeks, according to principles and values, including legal responsibility: providing honest advice based on a sound legal basis. Failure to do so may result in the client losing his rights or being subject to legal accountability. Also, ethical responsibility: adhering to the highest standards in dealing with his clients of various genders and beliefs, to be honest and fair in caring for their cases. Most importantly, his role in modern society: representing individuals and vulnerable groups and providing advice to confront official and unofficial institutions to achieve social justice. It is also his duty to provide legal opinions on public issues and to participate in drafting new legislation.

So what does it mean, then, to deprive the lawyer of playing his role in clarifying the rights of citizens in legal and political councils or in various media outlets, which represents a serious violation of the foundations of justice and freedom of expression? From a "legal" perspective: the lawyer is the primary guarantor of this right, as he provides legal defense and advice to his clients. Preventing him from performing this role constitutes a direct violation of constitutional and legal rights. If the state or any other institution, including the union, interferes in the work of the lawyer, this puts his independence at risk and negatively affects the fairness of legal procedures. Professional unions, including bar associations, are supposed to support the rights of their members and work to protect them from any illegal interference, not to impose restrictions on them that prevent them from performing their basic tasks of clarifying matters related to the lives and future of all segments of society without discrimination. From a "humanitarian" perspective, regardless of political or social pressure. Any attempt to prevent the lawyer from performing his role is a violation of this ethical obligation to provide fair and just defenses. When lawyers are prevented from performing their role, society loses one of the most important pillars of justice and may lead to its distortion, as unfair judgments may be issued as a result of the lack of adequate or appropriate defense, which poses a serious threat to the rights of individuals before the courts.

Therefore, the state must guarantee lawyers full independence to carry out their duties without interference or pressure, in order to ensure the achievement of social justice and the protection of the rights of individuals and civil entities.

In some oppressive regimes, lawyers have been restricted or prevented from defending the rights of individuals and community entities, which has led to serious violations of rights and freedoms. In such regimes, the judiciary is considered a tool of oppression instead of a means of achieving justice. It often leads to the spread of injustice and the widening gap between the legal system and society, which reduces public confidence in the judicial system.

The bottom line for the state and society: When the state or the union institution allows the restriction of the freedom of lawyers to appear in the media, the discussion of issues of justice and human rights becomes less balanced and comprehensive. This can lead to a decline in the level of societal dialogue and a lack of intellectual diversity in public discussions. At the same time, it would be: a negative message about the state and its institutions’ concept of democracy and human rights. Also, it could raise doubts about the integrity of the state’s political system and parties.

Human Rights View & Rule of Law (ROL) Perspective:

The actions taken by the Iraqi Bar Association to restrict lawyers from expressing opinions and providing advice in the media without a license raise significant concerns from a human rights and rule of law perspective. These restrictions appear to be motivated by political interests rather than genuine legal considerations, leading to potential violations of fundamental rights and freedoms.

Issues Identified:

1. Violation of Freedom of Expression: The restrictions imposed by the Bar Association limit the freedom of expression of lawyers, hindering their ability to participate in public discussions and provide valuable insights on matters affecting society. This infringes upon their right to freely express opinions and weakens their role in advocating for human rights and social justice.

2. Undermining the Rule of Law: By preventing lawyers from fulfilling their ethical and professional responsibilities, such restrictions undermine the rule of law. Lawyers play a crucial role in upholding justice, defending individual rights, and ensuring legal accountability. Any interference with their work jeopardizes the fairness of legal processes and undermines the integrity of the legal system.

3. Threat to Independence and Fairness: Interference by state institutions or professional unions in the work of lawyers jeopardizes their independence and compromises the fairness of legal procedures. Professional unions, including bar associations, should support their members and safeguard them from unlawful interventions rather than imposing restrictions that hinder their essential functions.

Suggested Solutions:

1. Upholding Freedom of Expression: It is imperative to respect and protect the freedom of expression of lawyers, allowing them to participate in public debates and share legal expertise without unnecessary constraints. This ensures a diverse and balanced dialogue on justice and human rights issues.

2. Ensuring Lawyer Independence: The state must guarantee the independence of lawyers in carrying out their duties without undue interference or pressure. This independence is crucial for upholding social justice, protecting individual rights, and maintaining public trust in the legal system.

3. Promoting Professional Ethics: Emphasizing the importance of ethical responsibilities among lawyers, including providing honest advice, upholding high standards in client interactions, and advocating for social justice without discrimination. Professional ethics are essential for maintaining the integrity of legal practice.

4. Respecting Humanitarian Obligations: Recognizing the humanitarian obligation of lawyers to provide fair and just defenses, irrespective of political or social pressures. Upholding this obligation ensures that individuals receive adequate legal representation and safeguards their rights before the courts.

By addressing these issues and implementing the suggested solutions, the Iraqi legal system can uphold human rights, promote the rule of law, and ensure that lawyers can fulfill their vital role in advancing justice and protecting the rights of individuals and society as a whole.