Lawyers do not judge

At the social level I have often been asked whether I, as a lawyer, would support a criminal, whom I may be acquainted with, with my inputs. Does it not make the lawyer anti-social in that he sides with the criminal? I have often reacted stating that the perception of the role of a lawyer is perhaps a tad misconceived by certain quarters of the society.

A lawyer is a professional and task is to remain wedded to it. Each profession has a code of conduct and more importantly a holistic morality of its own. The lawyer is required to voice the stance of a citizen. He is privy to the confidence of the client and is required to voice his stance. He brings on board information that over a period of time becomes knowledge. Its usage could also make it wisdom.

It is therefore clear that the lawyer is not a social cleanser but an insurance agent of those just citizens who use his skills to ensure that the Law is not in peril. I speak of all this in the context of legendary lawyer SR Ashok, who passed away in the early hours of Wednesday. This column is not an obituary. The man will surely be spoken about elsewhere and in details by many who knew him even casually.

He was what you would call the exemplary lawyer. He kept morality of others completely out of his system. In the privileged position I enjoyed of knowing him intimately, I have seen how the task came to him naturally. He never paused to value or judge a person in the context of his profession. This also aided him in not getting overtly passionate about his client or the cause.

Prepared with the law, armed with charm, focussed on the task at hand and sensitive to the bench he was addressing, he made the most complicated issue look as simple as swallowing tasty sandwiches. In an obituary to the man I would say that God takes them young as he loves them more. God takes them without suffering whom he treasures. Death is not a loss to the departed. It is tragedy for the survivors and those who have memories.

The success of a good lawyer, like in the case of SR Ashok, is the capacity to be non-judgemental. It is fundamental to being a lawyer. We moralise. We judge. We are constantly playing the reality show Big Brother from a moralistic or legal angle. We are labelling people. We are evaluating others. All this comes in place of applying it to ourselves. We are a huge aggregate of Double Speak. Ashok was the contrasting exception. He sure had his moral code and that was not to impose his sense of morality on others. That is the constant requirement of a lawyer.

While many of us would shout our lungs and bang the benches, this calm lawyer would carry his charming smile and his balance all the while. This unarmed curious judges and furious opponents. The man set an example and so perfect was the example that the man became an institution. The legal fraternity will learn from Ashok’s life. The fraternity would do well to understand his crucial role in society. Lawyers are not judges.

A person who jumps the gun and does the task of someone else does so at the risk of displacing the balance designed for the system. Imagine the gears deciding to play breaks or accelerator in your car. That is the vehicle for disaster. So let the advocate just be one. Let him not play judge. When lawyers play judges and judges play God we are stewing a soup with a recipe gone wrong.

By:L Ravichander