Pro Bono Cons

Decent Essays
Introduction The concept of mandatory pro bono and whether or not lawyers should be required to participate in this public service has been the contentious subject of debate over recent years. Focusing on Mirko Bagaric and Penny Dimopoulos’ statement: “In our view not only do lawyers not have a duty to act for free, but they are misguided in doing so and should, for the long term benefit of the community, cease engaging in pro bono work,” this essay will critically analyse the implications of introducing mandatory pro bono into the legal profession by examining both the positive and negative aspects through the issues of altruism, tradition, government funding and the onus on small firms. Arguments for Mandatory Pro Bono The benefits of…show more content…
Mirko Bagaric and Penny Dimopoulos argue that the introduction of mandatory pro bono will only encourage the government to continue to decrease it’s funding of legal aid services as the government will further shirk the responsibility onto the legal profession. For example, the current Australian budget has proposed yet another large decrease in government funding for 2017-2018, this includes the quarantining of some of the community legal centre funding. Furthermore, it is not fair of the government to place an expectation on the legal to perform legal services for free when there is no similar altruistic expectation placed on professional from other areas, such as: physiotherapists, chiropractors, doctors and psychologists. All the services provided by these other professions for “free” or at a discount are usually done so because the costs are then subsidized by the government. The introduction of mandatory pro bono should not be seen as a means for the government to avoid their responsibility to the legal community, instead if it is to be introduce it would need to be followed by the agreement of the government to provide more funding to legal
Get Access