FBE Magazine 2019 Spring Web€¦ · These are the salient features of the photography of Professionals and their level of Innovation, ta- ... other ADR: a new arsenal for international

FBE magazine Spring 2019

FEDERATION DES BARREAUX D’EUROPE 2019

Recent studies affirmed that the legal profession shows the highe-st percentage of law firms having not made investments in ICT; the highest percentage of micro inve-stors (remarking once again the peculiarity of the legal profes-sion); the highest percentage of law firms able to invest between 100 thousand and 250 thousand euros in ICT, demonstrating the rising of large law firms. Lawyers are the most intimidated professional category, as a whole, regarding the inadequacy of IT equipment and its digital skills. The percentage of professionals who dedicate part of their trai-ning to different subjects than those strictly technical-legal, such as management, marketing and communication, is very low. These are the salient features of the photography of Professionals and their level of Innovation, ta-ken this year by the Milan Poly-technic Observatory, who took care to "measure" the level of innovation observed from three specific indicators: propensity for collaboration with customers; use of technologies; ability to inter-cept the demand for business ser-vices. A "sort of digital bourgeoisie" will have to be born, which is increasingly digitally literate and aware of the strategic scope of innovation. The investment in ICT by the legal professions will have to grow, not only due to regulatory obligations (GDPR, e-invoicing, digital trials), but also for a grow-th in computing and digital kno-wledge. Lawyers seem to be underdeve-loped on the three typical lines of the digital economy: collabora-tion, digitalisation, innovation culture.

It should also be noted that young lawyers (and the competi-tion in Wroclaw - pag. 10 - is the proof) show a growing aware-ness of digital issues, new mar-ket dynamics and the use of IT solutions capable of improving organizational and certain busi-ness models. The impact of new technologies on the profitability of law firms proves its right: more than half of the professional offices, whe-re digital tools with a high rate of innovation are mostly present, recorded an increase of more than 10%. The challenge for the future will be to increase the spread of in-novative culture and a collabora-tive approach, which now, al-though growing, affects only about a third of professionals (mainly young). The most widespread technolo-gies are still those imposed by regulatory obligations, such as electronic invoicing and digital preservation of documents. The website is still struggling to take off, its use (38%) and inte-rest (27%) are not growing. The competitive environment in the supply of services, compared to a decade ago, is much more populous. The area of traditional services involves new players that studies identify especially in management consulting. It must be said (unfortunately) that in the legal market competi-tion is still played on prices and little on services, on the integra-ted offer or on the use of innova-tion tools. Conversely we must remember that a competition that is based mostly on price and not on quali-ty (even for modernity) is not exactly the right driving force for innovation and success.

"1

SUMMARY

2 BARCELONA - LES TROBADES DE BARCELONAThe power of gender

3 The Sant Raimon de Penyafort Private Foundation

4 47 EPK EUROPEAN PRESIDENTS’ CONFERENCEThe Rule of Law debate

7 LONDONThe Colombia Caravana

9 HAMMAMETAssises de la Méditerranée 2019For a Mediterranean Policy of Bars

10Social Economy and Solidarity economy matching in the socie-ty

11 RESOLUTION IN FA-VOUR OF MAÎTRE NASRIN SOTOUDEH

12 ANKARAReport of the meeting of 16 April 2019 between European Bar Federation (FBE) and the Bars of Istanbul, Ankara and the National Union of Turkish Bars.

10 FBE COMPETITION Law Firm of the Future Wroclaw / Den Haag Bars

14 WARSAW100th Anniversary of the War-saw Bar

14 SOFIA“Ethics guarantee of a fair trial”

Lawyers and IT organisation of the current law firms


Barcelona. 15th February 2019. The Barcelona Bar organises eve-ry year, with the collaboration of FBE, Les Trobades De Barcelona (Memorial Jacques HENRY), during the Festivity Of Sant Rai-mon De Penyafort This year the event was about The power of gender equality and it was divided in two panels: 1. Gender inequality in the legal profession: what are we doing to remove the obstacles to achieve parity? And 2 Challenges, oppor-tunities and benefits of empowe-ring female leadership in the le-gal profession. On 16th February the Barcelona Bar organised, for the second time, a Legal Brunch - round ta-ble with the participation of the international guests. The topic was about "International com-mercial tribunals, arbitration and other ADR: a new arsenal for international dispute resolution in the 21th century”. The Sant Raimon de Penyafort Private Foundation (taken from the report of Cristina Vallejo Ros) Presenttion. The Sant Raimon de Penyafort Private Foundation was establi-shed in Barcelona on December 21, 1995, during the term of

Dean Eugenio Gay Montalvo, within the framework of the events organised to commemora-te the 700th Anniversary of the Bar of Barcelona, as a renewed expression of his commitment to the fundamental values of the profession. The entities represented in the Board of Trustees are the Bar As-sociation of Barcelona (ICAB), the General Council of Spanish Lawyers (CGAE), the Council of the Illustrious Bar Associations of Catalonia (CICAC) and the Federation of Bar Associations of Europe (FBE). The Foundation brings together, under the name of the employer of lawyers, the representative institutions of the legal profession of Barcelona, Catalonia, Spain and Europe. The Foundation has its registered office at the headquarters of the Bar Association of Barcelona. Purposes. The Charter of Human Rights of the European Union proclaims in its Preamble that "the Union is founded on the universal and in-divisible values of human dignity, freedom, equality and solidarity" and places "the person at the cen-ter of your activity". The Sant Raimon de Penyafort

Foundation embraces this huma-nistic and personalist vision of Europe, reflecting on its willing-ness to configure itself as a social reference of the ethical and civic commitment of the legal profes-sion. The purposes of the Foundation are the dissemination of legal culture, as well as technical study and practical achievements in order to social reintegration of people who have been subjected to custodial sentences. As activities of study and resear-ch, the Foundation promotes the carrying out of actions of an edu-cational nature for the increase and diffusion of the legal culture, not only in their own professional environments, but also in society in general, as well as the exchan-ge between the different legal cultures of the world. With these objectives, the Foun-dation establishes and signs col-laboration agreements with enti-ties with similar purposes and organises and participates in con-ferences, congresses and infor-mative technical meetings of all kinds. The activity of the Foundation pays special attention to all issues related to the legal protection of

"2

BARCELONA - LES TROBADES DE BARCELONA (MEMORIAL JACQUES HEN-RY)

The power of gender equality.


minors and those at risk. In a time of profound social, eco-nomic, scientific and technologi-cal changes, when Europe is ex-periencing the most serious hu-manitarian refugee crisis since World War II, the contribution that legal reflection and the social involvement of the legal profes-sion represent is more necessary than ever. In this context, the Foundation wants to work in close collabora-tion with the entities of the legal, educational, social, economic, cooperation and all professional spheres in defense of the dignity of the person and their inaliena-ble rights. The Sant Raimon de Penyafort Foundation is, therefore, an in-strument that the legal profession puts at the service of society. Among the activities of the Foundation we mention the Espacio de Reflexión. The Espacio de Reflexión of the Sant Raimon de Penyafort Priva-te Foundation, which began in October 2016, is a regular mee-ting in which legal experts from other fields of knowledge discuss current issues related to the foun-dational purposes. The objective of this forum is to

present the voice of the legal pro-fession in the current public de-bate, in collaboration and dialo-gue with other disciplines of knowledge and in conjunction with other academic and social entities. University Area The Foundation promotes the signing of collaboration agree-ments with universities for the organization of seminars and in-ternships for students and the implementation of a Scholarship-Collaborators Program. On March 23, 2018 the Founda-tion signed a Collaboration Agreement with the Autonomous University of Barcelona (UAB) to promote relations and activi-ties of an academic, professional and research nature in areas of common interest for both institu-tions. Within the framework of the de-velopment of this Agreement, the Autonomous University of Bar-celona collaborates in the organi-zation of the Reflection Spaces of the Foundation. Reconciliation Award The Reconciliation Prize, of an annual nature, was instituted by the Foundation's Board of Tru-stees to reward individuals or

entities that have distinguished themselves through a career that expresses the values of the Foun-dation. The first edition of the Reconci-liation Prize has been awarded to the ARED Foundation (www.-fundacioared.org) for the Reinte-gration of Women, in recognition and homage to their generous solidarity work to achieve the social and labor integration of people in situations of social ex-clusion , mainly women coming from penitentiary centers and social services. The award ceremony took place on February 15, 2019 during the Solmene Session of the Sant Raimon de Penyafort Festival organized by the Bar Association of Barcelona. Related to school Within the framework of the "School for Children's Rights Program", the Foundation plans to organize awareness-raising workshops and activities to spread awareness of Children's Rights in schools.

"3

BARCELONA - LES TROBADES DE BARCELONA

The Sant Raimon de Penyafort Private Foundation.


Wien. 1st March 2019. FBE took part in the Presidents Conference 2019 in WIEN about the defense of the state and the rule of law. The European Confe-rence of Presidents has become a forum for dialogue in which the elected representatives of Eu-ropean lawyers’ organizations exchange experiences. The “informal principle” of the European Conference of Presi-dents with a friendly supporting program has proved its worth for more than a quarter of a century in uninterrupted continuity. From the speech of Petra Bárdi. Contribution to the Rule of Law debate at the 47th European Pre-sidents' Conference- 1. STATE OF THE ART After the regime change Hungary and Poland were the first “post-communist” countries to join the Council of Europe to abide by the European Convention on Human Rights in 1990. Hungary and Po-land established official relations with NATO and the EU already in the early 1990s and became members in 1999 and 2004 re-spectively. The EU played an important role in the transforma-tion of all the Eastern European states and in the context of their democratisation. The principle of conditionality was used to achie-ve this, coupled with the pre-sumption that any democratic or

Rule of Law ‘backsliding’ would not be possible once the tran-sformation is in place. History proved this presumption wrong. The shift came rather abruptly when in April 2010, in a free and fair election the center-right poli-tical parties Fidesz and the Chri-stian-Democrats got 53% of the votes, which translated according to the election law then in force into more than two-thirds of the seats in the unicameral Hunga-rian Parliament. The ruling party eliminated – at least in the dome-stic setting – all sources of criti-cism by both the voters and by the state institutions, effectively disposing of any effective checks and balances. Poland followed the path of illiberalism when the Law and Justice party entered government in 2015. Should a discontent electorate now wish to correct deficiencies, it will be difficult for it to do so due to the novel rules of the national ballot, which fundamentally question the fairness of elections. Judicial oversight and most importantly the Hungarian Constitutional Court’s room for correcting the failures of a majoritarian go-vernment have been considerably impaired, along the powers of other fora designed to serve as checks on government powers. Distortions of the media and lack of public information lead to the

impossibility of a meaningful public debate and weaken the chances of restoring deliberative democracy. The country experienced a very serious departure from democra-tic principles and is going throu-gh the reversal of the rule of law in various fields. The tools em-ployed and the outcome are very similar to the ones in Hungary, but certain elements of the Polish case also make it distinct, illu-strating that there was no Central Eastern European, or even Vise-grád pattern. For example, unlike Fidesz, the Polish government does not have a constitution-ma-king or – amending majority, the-refore – for the time being – it engages in rule of law backsli-ding by way of curbing ordinary laws, “trying to change the sy-stem thought the back door”. 2. THE SITUATION IN HUN-GARY AND POLAND IN LIGHT OF VALUES THE EU IS BASED ON State capture took different forms, but all in all it resulted in contravening values the EU is based on; values enshrined in Article 2 of the Treaty on the Eu-ropean Union (TEU), of which democracy, the rule of law and fundamental rights are overar-ching. This process is well docu-mented by renown international organisations, such as the Venice

"4

47 EPK EUROPEAN PRE-SIDENTS’ CON-FERENCE

The Rule of Law debate The Situation in Hungary and Poland in Light of Values the EU Is Based on


Commission or the OECD, but also as the Commissioned Rea-soned Proposal from December 2017ii or the September 2018 European Parliamentary Resolu-tioniii show, triggering Article 7 procedures against Poland and Hungary show, but also as 1 the growing number of infringe-ment cases with a rule of law element prove, Article 2 TEU values are no longer respected by these countries. In Hungary, there has been a con-tinuous decline for a decade now, but this year a point has been rea-ched, where – according to the most recent Freedom House re-port – for the first time since the democratic transition in 1989/90, and for the first time in EU histo-ry an EU Member State was do-wngraded from free to a partly free country: Hungary’s status declined from Free to Partly Free due to sustai-ned attacks on the country’s de-mocratic institutions by Prime Minister Viktor Orbán’s Fidesz party, which has used its parlia-mentary supermajority to impose restrictions on or assert control over the opposition, the media, religious groups, academia, NGOs, the courts, asylum see-kers, and the private sector since 2010.iv Freedom House assesses coun-tries’ political rights and civil liberties, and categorizes them as “free,” “partly free” or “not free.” By labelling it as “partly free”, Hungary joined the group of countries such as Albania, Boli-via, Pakistan, Singapore, Ukraine and Zimbabwe. A previously unimaginable situation has arisen whereby the EU harbours a Member State, which would ob-viously not qualify for Union membership if it were to apply today. The European Union, as a community of law, to borrow this term from founding father Walter

Hallstein,v and a community ba-sed on the rule of law, failed big in addressing illiberal develop-ments. 3. ATTEMPTS TO LEGITIMIZE RULE OF LAW BACKSLIDING Governments in violation of the rule of law are well aware of the fact that they do not comply with obligations arising from EU inte-gration and employ several tech-niques to legitimize backsliding.-vi First, the invocation of national sovereignty often happens wi-thout any further justification. Polish capture of the Constitutio-nal Tribunal, the Supreme Court, the National Council of the Judi-ciary, and ordinary courts happe-ned under the pretext that a so-called ‘reform’ of the judiciary was a matter for the Member Sta-tes and the EU had no powers to interfere. Another example from the same jurisdiction is the dispute related to the felling of trees in the Białowieża Forest,vii a UNESCO World Heritage Site. Pending the judgment in the main procee-dings, the Court of Justice orde-red Poland to stop logging. The Polish response was an intensi-fied logging of trees, and Poland even asked for removing the fo-rest from the UNESCO World Heritage List. Reference to natio-nal sovereignty came without any convincing justification. Second, a somewhat more sophi-sticated variation of the above ‘because we said so’ technique is the attempt to hide departures from the rule of law behind the veil of constitutional identity. It is of course a distorted understan-ding of constitutional identity,viii or even an abuse of the concept. The Hungarian example is illu-strative. When delivering its ab-stract constitutional interpretation in relation to European Council decision 2015/1601 on suppor-ting Italy and Greece in the refu-

gee crisis, the Hungarian Consti-tutional Courtix invoked constitu-tional identity. However tautolo-gical this may sound, according to the court, ‘constitutional iden-tity equals the constitutional (self- )identity of Hungary’. Its content is to be determined on a case-by-case basis based on the interpretation of the constitution, its preamble, and the achieve-ments of the Hungarian historical constitution. This definition is so vague that it can be considered as an attempt to grant a carte blan-che type of derogation to the exe-cutive and the legislative from Hungary’s obligations under EU law. In 2018 the concept of con-stitutional identity was even em-bedded in the Hungarian consti-tution. Third, the neo-McCarthyist label-ling of virtually anyone still ca-pable of formulating dissent as foreign agents is a technique long used, but in Hungary it was taken to a whole new level with the adoption of Lex CEU and Lex NGO, targeting a private univer-sity and foreign-funded civil so-ciety organizations that are inde-pendent of government funds and thereby fit to express government criticism. The explanations of the laws attempting to force the Cen-tral European University out of Hungary and to limit public space for NGOs respectively attempt to delegitimize these entities by claiming they pose national secu-rity threats to the country. The security-infused moves de-monstrate that the preservation of autocracy is more valuable in the eyes of the executive powers than not harming the key sectors of the national knowledge-economy. In the case of Lex CEU no fur-ther explanations were given as to how a leading academic entity could possibly be a threat to na-tional sovereignty, while in the case of Lex NGO, a populist rhe-toric was invoked, interlinking

"5


NGOs helping asylum seekers and the image of asylum seekers as potential terrorists. The fourth technique the autocra-ts use to undermine the rule of law is disinformation or misin-terpretation of the laws and poli-cies of the government. Again Hungary took the lead in 2011 when they sent a wrong transla-tion to Brussels of their contro-versial new constitution, the Fun-damental Law, which looked more in conformity with EU laws and values than the actual text. The Polish and Hungarian re-sponses to EU institutions invita-tion for a determination of a clear risk of a serious breach by these two Member States of values en-shrined in the founding EU Treaties also contain factual mistakes and de-liberate deceit. 4. ATTEMPTS TO LE-GITIMISE EU INAC-TION Now is not the time to remain silent. The EU should address the pro-blems in the national setting. One of the common counterarguments is that the people shall demo-cratically change their govern-ment if it violates the rule of law, instead of primarily relying on the EU to interfere. But it is naïve to believe that in a state with di-storted election laws, state captu-red supervisory authorities over-seeing the elections, or a distor-ted media landscape, this is doa-ble. Another argument is pragmatic: if the EU pushes too much, too for-cefully, the outcome may be pro-viding these governments with additional ammunition for gai-ning popular support to leave the EU, which would probably be even worse for their citizens in terms of the future rule of law. So it is the good old Council of Eu-

rope argument: better keep them inside and have control than not to have any influence at all. This again, is a valid debate. Here the question is a matter of balance: is the benefit of keeping them in in greater than the harm that may come from dismantling of EU values and potential proliferation of rule of law backsliding to other states. A further counterargument is that the EU is lacking competence, since issues such as elections or judicial organisations are national matters. The EU however shall acknowledge that violation of the rule of law in any Member State is an EU matter. Beyond harming nationals of the given country, a

state’s departure from European consensus on rule of law stan-dards will have EU-wide conse-quences. All EU citizens beyond the borders of the Member States concerned will to some extent suffer due to the given State’s participation in the EU’s deci-sion-making mechanism. Rule of law violations become conta-gious. Once the values of Article 2 TEU are not respected, the es-sential presumptions behind the core of the Union do not hold any more. Systemic violations of Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union (TEU) values will undermine mutual trust-based instruments, for example in the terrains of EU

criminal justice. In surrender ca-ses, most recently the court Ober-landesgericht Karlsruhe abando-ned the European Arrest Warrant model,x and in practice returned to the traditions of extradition making use of diplomatic chan-nels, and made surrender to Po-land dependent on the German embassy being allowed to take part in the trial in Poland and vi-sit the defendant in custody. Test cases were decided by Irish, Spa-nish and UK courts, and are pen-ding also in front of Dutch courts.xi The EAW cases aren't earth shat-tering in and of themselves, but judicial independence is equally important for the functioning of

the single market and the Eurozone. Lack of judi-cial independence may jeopardise autonomous EU law concepts, such as direct effect. Apart from these substantive problems, the principle of primacy would also be jeopardised. Member States’ apex courts will overwrite the principle of primacy of EU law, if they are forced to coope-rate with Member States

in which they have no confidence any longer. Therefore it is the whole EU law construct that is at stake here. The ‘values crisis’ may not seem as urgent as the other crises of the European Union, but it has the most far-reaching implications for the European project because without common values, there are fewer reasons for the EU to exi-st.xii Paraphrasing Albert Einstein: Europe is in greater peril from those who tolerate rule of law backsliding than from those who actually commit it.xiii In this spi-rit I very much welcome and I am looking forward to the debate today.

"6


London. 25th March 2019. FBE President took part in the Colombia Caravana launching report 2018 hosted by The Law Society of England and Wales, supported by FBE. The International Caravana tra-velled to Colombia in September 2018. 20 experts from six coun-tries focused their visit on the impact that the peace process has had on the work of human rights lawyers and the dynamics of the conflict. The Caravana travelled to six regions, meeting with lawyers, judges, human rights defenders, victims, and state representatives, among others. Delegates obser-ved that violence against human rights defenders and social mo-vements has escalated and that there has been a worrying para-digm shift in relation to the cha-racteristics of threats and how threats are acted upon, and a pro-liferation and re-emergence of illegal armed groups. The Peace Agreement remains precarious. Uncertainty regarding possible changes by the new ad-ministration evidently added to an increasing sense of insecurity. The Caravana heard concerns regarding the limited implemen-tation of core areas of the Agreement as related to substitu-tion of coca crops, the safety and reintegration of FARC ex-comba-tants, and the ability for the Spe-

cial Jurisdiction for Peace to establish the truth, reparations, and reconciliation needed to move forward, in particular re-garding the functioning of the JEP and issues of command re-sponsibility, military justice, ex-tradition, resourcing, and the pro-cess for the prioritisation of ca-ses. Human rights lawyers are at heightened risk because of their work seeking accountability and defending communities’ funda-mental rights. Delegates heard reports of repeated aggressions against them: threats to their lives and their families; break-ins and thefts of sensitive information; disciplinary complaints filed to hinder lawyers’ work; and stig-matisation by public officials un-duly linking lawyers to their clients or making accusations of their belonging to illegal armed groups. Human rights defenders and law-yers also face obstacles when seeking timely and appropriate protection from the state. The state’s approach to protection tends to be reactive rather than preventive and lacks understan-ding of the context in which law-yers work and how to take speci-fic circumstances of geography, culture, and gender into account when allocating protection mea-sures. It would be far removed from

reality to conclude that Colombia is in a period of post-conflict, let alone at peace. The International Caravana calls on the Colombian government to take on board our recommendations to see that ju-stice is done, rule of law is strengthened, and human rights are not only protected but flou-rish. To the international commu-nity, we ask that we take a global responsibility to stand in solidari-ty with those who are threatened, and that we speak out against violence and endeavour to sup-port those seeking justice and peace in Colombia. Human Right Defenders and the legal profession at risk. The signing of the Peace Agree-ment was an important step to-wards peace, however of over-whelming concern has been the dramatic increase of violence specifically targeted towards hu-man rights defenders, as noted by state 49, non-governmental, 50 and international institutions. 51 Programa Somos Defensores (translated as the We Are Defen-ders Programme and referred he-reinafter as Somos Defensores) registered the lowest rate of ove-rall killings of the last 30 years in Colombia in 2017 (24 per 100,000 inhabitants). However, that same year they also recorded the highest rate of killings of hu-man rights defenders and social leaders (106), 52 representing an

"7

LONDONColombia Caravana

FBE took part in the Colombia Caravana launching report 2018 hosted by The Law Socie-ty of England and Wales


increase of 32.5% from the kil-lings registered in 2016 (80). 53 Moreover, Somos Defensores registered 78 homicides in the first six months of 2018, while in same period of 2017 they registe-red 28, which means an increase of more than double compared to the same time period the previous year. 54 Moreover, the Office of the UN High Commissioner of Human Rights in Colombia regi-stered the killing of 121 human rights defenders in 2017, compa-red to 59 in 2016. Across all regions the Caravana visited, delegates heard testimony that carried a resounding message that the increased risk faced by human rights defenders is drama-tic, and attacks are a daily occur-rence. Those who are working to protect human rights and land in their communities are particularly targeted in what appears to be a systematic and deliberate attempt to gain control of territory. Of additional concern is that delega-tes reported that the speed in which threats are acted upon ap-pears to be increasing, with a number of individuals killed mere days after initial threats. In Valle del Cauca delegates found that not only has the level and frequency of violence increased, but so has the level of brutality, with dismemberment and mutila-tion of children being reported. The savage nature of the attacks is likely to reflect the desire of the numerous illegal armed groups to control communities through fear. Evidence of sexual violence towards women was also noted; which has long been used to demonstrate territorial power. This changing pattern of threats and violence is a para-digm shift since the last Caravana visit. The Caravana heard of numerous cases of threats and killings of human rights defenders who de-fend rights through legal proces-

ses, social movements, or politi-cal activities. All of the lawyers with whom the Caravana met reiterated the dire seriousness of the situation and emphasised the increase in the level of aggressions and kil-lings across the country, particu-larly since the Peace Agreement, noting that guarantees of non-repetition are yet to be made rea-lity and that the situation The Caravana notes that lawyers who are threatened tend to identi-fy the following as reasons for their harassment: that they are involved with cases related to land restitution, 58 extrajudicial executions, 59 or multinational companies; 60 or that they have reported alleged links between paramilitary groups and local authorities. 61 Undertaking high profile strategic litigation places human rights lawyers at further risk. Being a human rights lawyer in Colombia is high-risk because of the work they undertake repre-senting victims of human rights violations. A non-exhaustive list of threats they face includes: ha-rassment, stigmatisation through the unjust association of lawyers with the alleged crimes of their clients, illegal surveillance, break- ins and theft of sensitive information, fabricated and poli-tical charges, death threats and physical harm to them and their families. The situation of risk, a heavy and gruelling workload, and frustrations at obstacles to justice mean that for many lawyers, their emotional and mental well-being can be as much a risk as their physical health. The bur-nout faced by lawyers who must operate in such trying circumstances itself is an obstacle to justice, especial-ly at a time when Colombia is implementing new judi-

cial processes has worsened si-gnificantly. Delegates saw evi-dence of a grave situation which undermines progress made in the lead up to the Peace Agreement. In addition to the concerning number of threats lawyers and other human rights defenders continue to receive, delegates also noted a very worrying shift in dynamics, particularly regar-ding the level of threat to com-munity leaders. From testimony gathered in a number of regions, the Caravana understands that threats are becoming realised at a far more rapid pace than previous years, and in some cases, indivi-duals are not threatened prior to being targeted; that is to say they are targeted directly and without warning, making a reassessment of the system for the provision of state protection measures an ur-gent need. The situation of human rights defenders and people’s ability to exercise the fundamental free-doms of expression and assembly has been further impacted by the criminalisation of protest with changes to the police code and protocols on protest. It has been suggested that these changes aim to restrict protest 57 by social movements. Delegates under-stand that serious criminal char-ges are being used in an attempt to deter protesters, for example, some of the charges levied again-st protesters carry up to 28 years imprisonment.

"8


Hammamet. 29th - 30th March 2019. The “Assizes of the Mediterra-nean Sea” is a fixed and annual event of the FBE expressly dedi-cated to lawyers of the nations facing the shores of our Mediter-ranean sea. It is a special occasion and each time provides a primary contribu-tion to the values of democracy and the rule of law. This year the meeting was orga-nised by the Tunis Bar Associa-tion in collaboration with the FBE and the FBE Mediterranean Commission. During the opening ceremony the FBE President stressed the im-portance of the role played by the Tunisian lawyers during the “Arab Spring” and reported the troubles within the Mediterranean Commission during the organiza-tion of those events, so important for the guarantee of democracy in North Africa and more. It was not a declaration of cir-cumstance but a real historical reconstruction and a formal reco-gnition of the value and commit-ment of Tunisian lawyers and civil society. The President of the FBE has therefore proposed and solicited the submission by the Tunisian national Bar of an application for

the membership of the FBE as an “observer member”, a role which can be covered by non-European Bars but which recognized the principles established by the Eu-ropean Council and by the FBE (which is based on the Council's demographic basis). Another factor that the President has repeatedly stressed with great pleasure and pride was the mas-sive, qualified and interested par-ticipation of the Tunisian women lawyer. A clear sign of an affirmed and confirmed democracy as well as shared by the society. The theme of the Assisez was about “For a Mediterranean Poli-cy of Bars”. The working ses-sions were divided in to three panels. The first panel was on the “Relations between the Bars of both shores: Expectations and perspectives”. The second con-cerned “Digital technology: an opening for the future for the Bars of the Mediterranean”. The third was focused on “The role of arbitration in the Mediterranean”. The Fourth was about the “Inter-nationalisation of the Legal ser-vice”. The fifth concerned “The Bar in the social and solidarity economy: a place to conquer a market”. The sixth was focused on A new modernity:

the changing situation of women in the bar associations and civil society”. In the sixth panel was really ap-preciated the intervention of Pa-tricia Barcena, Vice President of the Bilbao Bar, who spoke about Lawyers In The Social And Soli-darity Economy. In recent years, mainly as a result of the economic crisis, new voi-ces have emerged that demand economic alternatives generating a more just, equitable and sustai-nable wealth. Lawyers can not and should not remain alien from this reality. What today is called the Social and Solidarity Economy (ESS) has its origin in the confluence between two different concepts: the social economy and the soli-darity economy, emerged in diffe-rent times and contexts but sha-ring common principles. The social economy was born in the early nineteenth century, as derivate from the social disen-chantment arising from the con-sequences of the industrial revo-lution; of public indifference to the needs of citizens and - accor-ding to some authors - with the objective of questioning the "economics of economists" and integrating social problems into the study of economics.

"9

ASSISES DE LA MÉDITERRANÉE

The President of the FBE has proposed and solicited the submission by the Tunisian na-tional Bar of an application for the membership of the FBE as an “observer member”.


The solidarity economy, on the other hand, is defined by the French author Jean Louis Laville, as the set of organisations of the “new social economy” that emer-ge in response to the crisis of the development model based on the market-state synergy. Organisa-tions that try to provide answers to structural unemployment and respond to needs that are not sol-ved by the market or by the pu-blic sector. In Latin America, in the 1980s, the concept of “popu-lar economy” also emerged and its main value was solidarity. Both economic models were born mainly from the citizen’s dissati-sfaction, their ability to resilience and mutual recognition. Today they converge in the so-called Social and Solidarity Eco-nomy (ESS), which REAS, the Red de Redes de Economía Al-ternativa y Solidaria, defines as “a vision and a practice that claims the economy as a instru-ment - and not as an aim - at the service of improving the quality of life of people, the community and their natural environment. An economy that places at the center of its activity the personal and collective good living, as well as the sustainability of life, and that values, therefore, the real function of the economy and connects it with the social, politi-cal and cultural spheres”. A different economic model that today encompasses, in a broad perspective, from the old coope-ratives, mutual societies or labor companies, to a new set of enti-ties such as: social insertion

companies, special employment centers, fishermen's associations, entities of ethical and solidarity bonds, community consumption groups, and associations and foundations of the third sector that carry out economic activities. The range is as broad as their legal typologies, their legal cha-racteristics (fiscal, labor, ...) and their particularities of manage-ment. And they play a key role in social development. Only the European Social Economy repre-sents 8% of the EU GDP, 13.6 million jobs and almost 3 million companies. Although its potential is growing, the association of these alternati-ve forms of production, distribu-tion and consumption with the “non-profit” and social responsi-bility, understood as the social contribution within the traditional capitalist model, have meant that in the of the legal profession, the ESS has not been an issue that is especially present in the spaces of training and legal practice. Ho-wever, there are several factors that should push the legal profes-sion to become more active. The first and our most important obligation, as professionals and as an institution, is to contribute to social transformation, to the generation of fairer societies that guarantee equal rights and oppor-tunities. It is important to re-member, as stated in the Oxfam International Report 2017, that the accumulation of wealth in few hands and inequality is un-stoppable “Only 8 people (8 men in reality) already have the same

wealth as 3,600 million people, the poorest half of humanity”. In contrast to the traditional capi-talist model, the ESS companies have shown that in times of crisis their resistance is greater, since the decisions respond to the needs of people and not to the unlimited obtaining of benefits; they have demonstrated their commitment to permanent and stable work, equality, the inclu-sion of disadvantaged groups, location and, above all, have shown that being governed by more participatory, more solidari-ty or more transparent systems do not make you (or) less competiti-ve. Rationality and social pro-gress are compatible. Our commitment to the 2030 Agenda and the search for a mo-del of sustainable social, econo-mic and environmental develop-ment is closely linked to the need to make visible and promote this type of alternative economy that comes developed for years and that must be put in value. For this, the formation of the legal profession, the knowledge of the legal modalities, the public pro-curement opportunities that pro-mote it, or the European and In-ternational political commitment are fundamental. Being an active part of the chal-lenge of “transforming the world” and achieving access to all rights by all people also requi-res our contribution and work in favour of business models, con-sumption or production, that fa-vour their achievement.

"10

ASSISES DE LA MÉDITERRANÉE

Social Economy and Solidarity economy matching in the socie-ty


Hammamet. 30th March 2019. The European Bars Federation (FBE) and The Ordre National des Avocats de Tunisie in their meeting of the the Mediterranean Assises, held in Hammamet on 29-30 March 2019, Have unanimously adopted the following

Resolution The European Bars Federation and the Ordre National des Avo-cats de Tunis want to: Express their maximum solidarity with the lawyer Nasrín Sotoudeh, winner of the Sakharov Prize for Freedom of Conscience of the European Parliament in 2012, who has assumed the defence of notorious personalities such as the Nobel Prize of Peace 2013 Shirín Ebadí or of the opponents arrested during the protests of the Green Movement of 2009. Recognise the work of people or institutions that have stood out for their merits or relevant servi-ces in favour of the rule of law and human rights protection. Express their deep concern about the situation of human rights de-fenders and lawyers in Iran, who are frequently subjected to arbi-trary detention and other forms of harassment, as well as the gro-wing social exclusion of the Ira-nian Bar Association, to the de-

triment of legal assistance and a fair trial. Urge to all States to comply with the Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers, adopted at the Eight United Nations Congress on the Prevention of Crime and the Treatment of Offenders, held in Havana (Cuba) on August/Sep-tember 1990, asking for an effec-tive protection for all lawyers, permitting them to continue with their legitimate and peaceful ac-tivities in defence of human rights without fear of intimida-tion, harassment, reprisals and the loss of their own lives. Express their firm commitment to support all those initiatives pro-moted in any country in the world for the protection and safe-guarding of the exercise of the right of defence that corresponds to lawyers in a State governed by the rule of law, guarantee of the rights and freedom of citizens. Michele Lucherini FBE President

Ameur Mahrezi Bâtonnier Ordre des Avocats de Tunisie

"11

RESOLUTION IN FAVOUR OF MAÎTRE NASRIN SOTOUDEH

… Express their deep concern about the situation of human rights defenders and lawyers in Iran,


Ankara. 15 April 2019. Alar-ming news has been reported about the final hearings of the trial held in Istanbul against about twenty lawyers, members and militants of the Association of Progressive Jurists (CHD). There were a series of heavy sen-tences, up to eighteen years in prison. The "crime"? Having taken the legal profession seriously, defen-ding members of organisations considered illegal by the regime, miners victims of disasters at work, those who opposed the ur-ban devastation project called Gezi Park and many other oppo-sition social subjects. On 5th April 2019 some interna-tional organisation of lawyers published a declaration about that trail. The Bars from Turkey seems not to be involved. FBE’s Presidency decided to do different: going to Ankara to meet the representative of the National Bar Council (UTBA), Ankara and Istanbul Bar to di-scuss with them, getting directly news about the process and set the strategy in according with the Turkish lawyers. So on 16 Aprile 2019, it has been held a special meeting with the Turkish colleagues to get directly news and organise the best initia-tives. The working meeting - that mee-ting started at 16.00 and lasted until 19.00 hours - was held on the seventh floor of the premises

of the UTBA. Simultaneous translation was provided into Turkish and English, but the mo-sto part of the conference was directly in English with non me-diation.The whole meeting was filmed. Michele Lucherini explained the reasons for FBE visit. The Turkish representatives con-gratulated FBE on its approach. They described at length the si-tuation in Turkey. The Turkish representatives pre-sented, with poignant examples, the problems they face: - The increasingly serious infrin-gement of professional secrecy; - The systematic use of phone tapping against the lawyer; - The fact by judges to prevent lawyers from accessing the cour-troom; - The mode of appointment of the judicial council; - The lack of training and expe-rience of magistrates; - A deterioration of the respect of the rules of law in general - The absence of procedural safe-guards. They do not expect much help from the Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg, especially because the delays are too long. We had previously submitted the text of the previous declaration signed by a number of organiza-tions on the occasion of the Tur-kish Lawyer's Day. The Turkish delegation has taken note of this text which had been made available to them in En-

glish and Turkish. The three delegations agreed that the text contained errors in the number of imprisoned lawyers and the reasons for their impri-sonment. The President of the UTBA presented updated figures which were far from the figures included in the text. He said that such texts were rather counter-productive, since containing er-rors, it could be interpreted in Turkey as resulting from manipu-lation for political purposes, or-chestrated by some dissident groups and even by some illegal organisations. Michele Lucherini proposed to set up a working group to analyse how the federation could give more effective help to Turkish bar associations. This proposal was enthusiastically accepted. The representative of the UTBA was immediately appointed in the person of Me Necdet Basa, senior counsel to the president. The Bars of Istanbul and Ankara will desi-gnate a representative after ha-ving deliberated in their Counsel. Michele Lucherini appointed as representatives of the federation in this working group Charles Kaufhold and Artur Wierzbicki.

"12

ANKARA

Report of the meeting of 16 April 2019 between European Bar Federation (FBE) and the Bars of Istanbul, Ankara and the National Union of Turkish Bars.


On the 12th of April 2019, the international FBE Law firm of the future competition came to an exciting final in Wroclaw, Po-land. Eleven finalists from Po-land, Turkey, Bulgaria, The Ne-therlands and Spain gave a Power Point presentation with their vi-sion on the law firm of the future. The competition was open to young lawyers and law students. Every competitor or team had to submit a Power Point presenta-tion with a view to the future. All participants saw the technological developments as most disruptive to the legal profession. Robot-lawyers, smart contracts, outco-me predicting systems, Digi-bar,

automated front desks and other innovative ideas filled the room. The Jury (Paulina Kolowca, To-masz Szarek, Aga Poteralska, Olivier Renault, Christoph Munz and Bas Martens) decided that Rumyana Yordanova and Gabrie-la Hristova from the international law firm Penkov Markov from Sofia were the winners. In their point of view, to survive, the law firm of the future should be run as a commercial business. Law

firms should deliver ‘more for less’ and run on technology like artificial intelligence. Outsour-cing of tasks and cooperation with other disciplines will be key factors in the future. And with a warning: we should be very care-ful that artificial intelligence does

not take over the role of humans. The comprehensive and credible presentation made Rumyana en Gabriela the justified winners! Runner up was Ludmila Glem-botzky Goya from Akro Aboga-dos y asesores Bilbao, Spain was the runner up. She had very in-novative ideas and elaborated about the benefits of Blockchain-technology, video-conferencing, legal outcome prediction and smart contracts. She emphasized that Legal Tech ‘is and must re-main only a tool and must never replace the lawyer’. The brothers Yavor Stoychev (Stoychev & Stoycheva law firm) and Yasen Stoychev (KPG Bulgaria) from Sofia came in third. In a very profession presentation they en-visioned a fully digital law firm where face to face contact with the client is no longer necessary.

They mentioned digital archiving of documents with real time ac-cess for clients, digital conferen-ce rooms, more control for clien-ts, digital assistants and innova-tions on time management. The jury especially recommended Cem Sanap Alperen (Guner law office) from Istanbul for his swir-ling presentation: ‘Cem has the energy and persuasiveness every client wishes from his lawyer’. The Bar association of Wroclaw hosted the event on the 12th of April, 2019. Izabela Konopacka (KS legal Wroclaw, chair of the international commission of the Bar of Wroclaw) and her team gave a warm welcome to the par-ticipants and the jury with a deli-cious lunch and dinner. The event was co-organized by the Bar of The Hague, The Netherlands. The first prize winners are invited to the FBE congress in Barcelona on May 31-June 1, 2019 in Bar-celona to receive their award. The runner up will be invited to the FBE congress in Lisbon on 24-26 October, 2019. The third prize winners are welcomed to travel to Wroclaw and visit the internatio-nal law firm of SDZ Legal Schindhelm.

"13

FBE COMPETITION

Law Firm of the Future Wroclaw / Den Haag Bars


Warsaw. 11th May 2019. The Warsaw Bar celebrated 100 years of serving the Polish socie-ty on 11th May. Over 1000 law-yers attended including Judges, Academics and representatives of the parliament. There were inter-national delegates and speeches from Marie-Aimee Peyron, Ba-tonniere of the Paris Bar, and Professor Sara Chandler QC (Hon), Immediate Past President of the FBE. We were in the pre-sence of many distinguished law-yers, and guests, and there were awards for the most notable members of the Warsaw Bar. The Dean of the Warsaw Bar, Mikolaj Pietrzak, paid tribute to the lawyers who had established the bar association in the imme-diate aftermath of the First World War. Over the last 100 years there have been many times when law-yers were persecuted for their steadfast and heroic stand against the destruction of the rule of law, the abuse of human rights and the erosion of the right to defend. Polish lawyers defended human rights through the holocaust, th-rough invasion and occupation, and totalitarian regimes. Even today the independence of judges has been eroded by the Polish government restructuring of the judiciary. During the introduction of legi-slation in the last two years to remove the independence of Po-lish judges, the Polish govern-

ment changed the disciplinary system. Now the appointments for the disciplinary structure come from the government and is not independent. Recent discipli-nary proceedings on 10th May were taken against an advocate who is representing people arre-sted for demonstrating against the government. It is a clear attack on the role of the legal professional and the right to defend their clients without penalty. The issue for the demonstrators is freedom of speech. Sara Chandler expres-sed the support of the FBE for the advocate who has been discipli-ned, and the FBE’s continued support for the independence of judges and lawyers in Poland. As the Polish lawyers pointed out, we must all be vigilant in the protection of the legal profession, because what is happening in Poland can also be introduced in other jurisdictions.

Sofia. 10th 11th May 2019. FBE Vice President Dominique ATTIAS took part in the Interna-tional Conference “Ethics gua-rantee of a fair trial” her in Sofia on 10-11- May 2019. The symposium was attended by both the Sofia Bar Association,

the French Bar Association and the Supreme Council of Bulga-rian Lawyers, which is equivalent to the French, Italian or Spanish National Councils. Great interest resided in the pre-sence of French and Bulgarian magistrates. The interventions of Elie EL-KAIM on the Swiss system and the Bâtonnier André CHIDIAC were very appreciated. Obviously, lawyers are much more protected in Lebanon than it can be in France and even in Swi-tzerland. In fact, a lawyer cannot be prose-cuted, except in flagrante delicto, and only after the Bar Council has been seized and has authori-zed the prosecution. Decisions are under appeal in front of the Court of Appeal in its civil formation, including two members of the Bar Council. Any questioning can only be done in the presence of the Presi-dent of the Bar or his delegate. Presentations about the situation of judges in France were extre-mely interesting, as long as now it exists a code of ethics also ap-plicable to the magistrates. Not so good is the situation con-cerning Bulgarian judges and lawyers that has been described quite worrying, mostly because of some episodes of corruption. The Embassy of France organised a meeting with FBE Vice Presi-dent.

"14

WARSAW100th Anniversary of the War-saw Bar

SOFIA“Ethics guarantee of a fair trial”

Documents

FBE Magazine 2019 Spring Web€¦ · These are the salient features of the photography of Professionals and their level of Innovation, ta- ... other ADR: a new arsenal for international