The Guardian Council referred the lifting of the monopoly of advocacy to the parliament / Will the deputies submit to the pressure of the lawyers?

EconomyOnlineصبا نوبری; In recent years, the protest against the monopoly in the field of advocacy and the opposition to the capacity of the Bar Association to allow law graduates to enter the labor market, opened the door for parliament to end the margins once and for all by recognizing the business of advocacy in the text of the law. And included this area in the scope of the country’s anti-monopoly laws.

On November 17 this year, the Islamic Consultative Assembly finally approved a bill to amend Articles 1 and 7 of the General Policy Implementation Law, Article 44 of the Constitution, which has been on the agenda since the previous Assembly, according to which the legal profession will be considered a business. He sent this resolution to the Guardian Council for approval. At a meeting held on December 10, the Guardian Council objected to the plan and returned it to parliament.

However, the spokesman of the Guardian Council recently emphasized in a press conference that neither the jurists nor the jurists of the Guardian Council recognized the objections of the lawyers and the resolution has other objections, of course, follow-ups and changes by the parliament are possible.

Why do we say advocacy is business?

The question may be asked, why is there any need for business to be represented in the text of the law, and why did the parliament take such an action?

Monopoly in the country’s legal field is an issue that has been followed by protests by law graduates for years. Those who believe that the Bar Association has monopolized this sector by creating capacity and creating barriers to their easy entry into the labor market.

The shortage of lawyers in the country and the high fees of existing lawyers, which has made it difficult for the public to access legal services, also confirm this claim. But how to deal with capacity building in this area?

According to Article 7 of the General Policy Implementation Law, Article 44, no institution or organization is allowed to refuse to issue a business license under the pretext of market saturation. But lawyers believe that advocacy is not a business and they do not have to comply with the law, so they have the capacity to issue a license.

Now, in amending Articles 7 and 1 of this law, the parliament seeks to explicitly mention the power of attorney as a business, so that lawyers can no longer shy away from implementing this law on the pretext that they are not a business.

In fact, the business of being a lawyer has not hurt or disrupted the profession, it only breaks the monopoly that some people today definitely benefit from.

The Guardian Council threw the ball on the floor of the parliament?

Although the Guardian Council did not consider the lawyers’ objections to the parliament’s decision and stated that both jurists and jurists consider advocacy a business, it stated that the parliament could change its decision. A comment that raises the suspicion that the Guardian Council dropped the ball on the floor of the parliament to implement the changes.

What is the program of the parliament?

Now that lawyers have another opportunity to change their minds and remove their names from the text of the bill, they are putting more pressure on the representatives to change their minds to change their minds and remove the business-related clause of being considered a lawyer. According to the Bar Association, some members of parliament have promised to refer lawyers’ concerns to parliament. But in the meantime, will they play their role as representatives of the nation properly or will they succumb to the pressure of those lawyers who benefit from this monopoly?