Legal Aid in India

Over the past years, it have been obvious, that jailhouse lawyers have increased the number of lawsuits filed by prisoners. In the year of 1980, prisoners filed 12,395 petitions of civil rights claims and in the year of 2000, prisoners filed 24,463 petitions of civil rights claims, in the Federal Courts, by State prisoners.(Mays & Winfree Jr, 2005, pp.304). Jailhouse lawyers have helped inmates file these petitions against the Federal Courts, in the favor of other inmates challenging their conditions of confinement. The conditions of their confinement seems to be, prisoners way for wanting to receive a sentence reduction, sometimes, a release from prison. On the other hand, prisoners tend to use jailhouse lawyers to file petitions that

More than ever people are losing access to justice. Even though the global economic crisis affected everyone, and every jurisdictions budget there needs to be a minimum level of funding for legal aid to protect the rights of those that cannot afford legal aid (Hainsworth, 2010). According to Hainsworth, (2010) the Canadian Bar Association has asked for national standards for legal aid, just like there are standards for health care and education. The CBA believes legal aid reform is needed to ensure access to justice for low income people, it also believes funding must be increased and national standards for eligibility and civil coverage are necessary to make the system function properly again.

“A first class court system and a first class legal profession are of no avail to a person who cannot afford to access them.” Sir Anthony Mason, former Chief Justice of the High Court of Australia.

Whenever an inmate gets incarcerated or is found guilty for a conviction, many of their rights go away except for a select few. The few rights that prisoners get to keep are, but are not limited to, visitation rights, mail services, religious gatherings and studies, medical treatment and care, and access to courts and legal assistance. These services help inmates stay in touch with society and help inmates get treated fairly throughout the facility (Santillan, 2010). In 1969, there were approximately 300,000 people incarcerated in federal, state, and county jails or prisons. Today that number surpasses 2.4 million and to add to it, there are approximately 4 million under parole or probation (People’s Law Office).

There are three different methods that states use to provide indigent defense; public defenders, assigned counsel, and contract attorneys. Depending on the size of a city or county usually determines what type of indigent defense is employed. Public defender programs can be public or private nonprofit organizations (Neubauer & Fradella, 2011). Public defender programs are found mostly in populous jurisdictions and are most effective in defending large numbers of indigent clients (Wice, 2005). Sometimes counties or states will use more than one type of defense for indigents. Today, public defender programs represent close to seventy percent of all indigent defense nationwide (Neubauer & Fradella,

This issue, and the injustice surrounding it, was first made evident in the case of Dietrich v the Queen, the high court recognised the need for adequate legal representation. In an attempt to redress inequalities of access to the legal system, the Australian Government enacted the Commonwealth Legal Aid Commission Act 1977, which established cooperative arrangements between the Australian Government and state and territory governments, under which legal aid would be provided by independent legal aid commissions, to be established under state and territory legislation. However, Legal aid is not offered to everyone. In order to qualify for legal aid individuals must pass means (level of income or assets) and merit (matter is serious enough and likely to win) tests. This establishes justice and equality for defendants of low socioeconomic status, upholding procedural

In conclusion, prisoners have more civil rights in American prisons than in many other countries, and prison conditions are much more humane in America than in many other countries. The challenge for the twenty-first century is maintaining a proper balance between the well-being of inmates and ensuring that incarceration is unpleasant enough to act as a deterrent to crime. The courts have developed a body of law that attempts to balance prisoners’ rights with the legitimate goals and concerns of

The injustice of incarcerating a defendant that was tried and convicted without the representation of an attorney is “an obvious truth.” Gideon, 372 U.S. 344. Yet, isn’t there truth to the shocking injustice of leaving the poor and most vulnerable without representation for legal issues regarding basic needs such as shelter, food, safety, family and health? The decision in Gideon stressed that a criminal conviction, stripping an individual of their liberty, without the representation of counsel was a grave injustice that violated the dues process clause. The poor are denied due process, suffering a loss liberty and justice because they cannot afford legal representation. In some cases, the loss is just as great if not greater than being convicted of a crime or imprisoned. Kathryn Grant Madigan, Advocating for a Civil Right to Counsel in New York State Note, 25 Touro Law Review 9–22 (2009).

Mason and McHugh argue against the support of free legal representation though do address the basis of the claim and how it appears fall under the ICCPR’s standards. by referring to paragraph Article 14 of the ICCPR states, ‘In the determination of any criminal charge against him, everyone shall

The need for basic civil legal assistance for people who cannot afford to pay for an attorney is overwhelming. Nearly 20% of the U.S. population (63 million) qualify for LSC-funded legal services based on the latest (2015) data from the U.S. Census Bureau, yet studies have consistently found that less than 20 percent of the legal problems experienced by the poor are being met. Moreover, LSC’s justice gap studies (2005, 2009) determined that for every individual serviced by an LSC-funded legal aid program, another is turned away due to inadequate resources.

a.) The excerpt displays the belief that each suspect in a court case has the right to legal representation whether they can afford it or not. The excerpt argues that suspects who can afford a lawyer often hire the most preeminent lawyers “to prepare and present their [thorough] defenses” (1). Thus, the excerpt voices that if a lawyer is this essential to a court case, then they must be provided to those accused who can’t afford one because not providing one could be a sense of restricting one’s freedom.

The importance of legal representation to those considered to be poor or disadvantaged is vital to the outcome they receive in legal processes. In saying this, eligibility for public funded representation such as legal aid can be difficult to obtain (Hall 1993). Legal aid provides assistance to people unable to afford legal representation and access to the court system (Hall 1993). Legal aid is defined as a grant of legal assistance free-of-charge, for people who cannot afford their own representation and meet certain criteria such as a means test to determine eligibility (Australian Government 2017). Published research has illustrated that the chances of people being successful rises from 20 percent to 35 percent when professionally represented

The criminal justice system depends on victims. They depend on them to report crimes and to assist in holding the offenders accountable. In the past victims and their families had no formal rights and were treated unfairly. Today victims and their families have basic rights and protections. All victims have the right to attend criminal proceedings, right to compensation, right to be heard, right to be informed, right to privacy, right to protection, and right to restitution. Court proceedings can be very emotional and stressful for victims and their families especially if the criminal is handed a minimal or unfair sentence.

They state that access to justice directs at the impeachments of barriers that confront people living in poverty from utilizing the legal system in the form of three “waves”. The first wave entailed the emergence of legal aid in the developed countries in the period after the Second World War. This wave intended to provide direct legal services to economically disadvantaged persons involved in the justice system. More recently, the United Nations Special Rapporteur on the Independence of Judges and Lawyers (Knaul, A/HRC/23/43, 15 March 2013) state that legal aid seeks to eradicate the barriers which impede access to justice by providing assistance to those who would not otherwise have been able to afford legal representation and access to the court system (Knaul, A/HRC/23/43, 15 March 2013, para. 27). To be more specific, the right to legal aid refers to both a right and an essential guarantee for the effective exercise of other human rights including the right to an effective remedy, the right to equality before the courts and tribunals, the right to counsel and the right to a fair trial (Knaul, A/HRC/23/43, 15 March 2013, para.

The Supreme Court of India has adopted a forward-looking approach since last few years, particularly having regard to the socio-economic conditions prevailing in the country. In fact there are two kinds of approaches which characterise the functioning of the highest Court in every