The ILIA-By BELIEVE Laboratory has presented a draft law on the legal profession in a future democratic Belarus.
The draft introduces new concepts, including that of a “potential client”, and clarifies the scope of attorney-client privilege, explicitly covering even the fact of seeking legal assistance. It also specifies the forms of legal practice – individual practice or practice within a bureau – among other provisions.
The draft further restructures the structure of the bar: the proposed umbrella body would be the Bar Association of Belarus, within which several commissions would be established. These would include a Qualification Commission composed exclusively of attorneys, with the right to invite representatives of “the academic community, civil society, and other individuals” to provide methodological support and to enhance public trust in its work. Another commission envisaged in the draft, common to many developed bar associations, would be a Commission for the Protection of the Independence of the Profession and Attorneys.
The final article of the draft regulates the restoration of licences for attorneys who were repressed by the state.
The full text of the draft can be read at the link provided.
We also remind readers that our website hosts a dedicated section on the “Bar of the Future”, focusing on the ideas and principles needed to build a qualitatively new institution in Belarus. This section features reflections and thoughts from experts on how the reform of the legal profession should look and what its substance should be.
There we reiterate the appeal made by the Right to Defence project to specialists involved in preparing reform proposals:
We believe that open exchange of well-founded and reasoned opinions fosters new ideas, legitimises the process of preparing reforms, and makes that process clearer and more broadly shared within the professional community. We therefore urge the authors of any reform projects — whether concerning the legal profession, judicial reform, lustration, or rehabilitation — to share from the outset their ideas, reasoning behind proposed provisions, alternative options under discussion, and arguments both accepted and rejected. Oral discussions and expert consultations are undoubtedly important, but true depth of thought emerges only when it is set down in writing. Written arguments can be challenged, alternative views expressed, counter-arguments presented, and new evidence introduced. This process maximises the expertise available from the community and allows ideas to be tested through multiple rounds of substantive discussion, leading to their crystallisation. Publishing only the final text of proposed reforms does not constitute such discussion: in our view, debate should focus on ideas and reasoning, not merely on the wording of a final draft. We will gladly provide a platform for such publications, but even if they are hosted elsewhere, we will support them, as we believe that in any case the reform process will benefit.
The draft introduces new concepts, including that of a “potential client”, and clarifies the scope of attorney-client privilege, explicitly covering even the fact of seeking legal assistance. It also specifies the forms of legal practice – individual practice or practice within a bureau – among other provisions.
The draft further restructures the structure of the bar: the proposed umbrella body would be the Bar Association of Belarus, within which several commissions would be established. These would include a Qualification Commission composed exclusively of attorneys, with the right to invite representatives of “the academic community, civil society, and other individuals” to provide methodological support and to enhance public trust in its work. Another commission envisaged in the draft, common to many developed bar associations, would be a Commission for the Protection of the Independence of the Profession and Attorneys.
The final article of the draft regulates the restoration of licences for attorneys who were repressed by the state.
The full text of the draft can be read at the link provided.
We also remind readers that our website hosts a dedicated section on the “Bar of the Future”, focusing on the ideas and principles needed to build a qualitatively new institution in Belarus. This section features reflections and thoughts from experts on how the reform of the legal profession should look and what its substance should be.
There we reiterate the appeal made by the Right to Defence project to specialists involved in preparing reform proposals:
We believe that open exchange of well-founded and reasoned opinions fosters new ideas, legitimises the process of preparing reforms, and makes that process clearer and more broadly shared within the professional community. We therefore urge the authors of any reform projects — whether concerning the legal profession, judicial reform, lustration, or rehabilitation — to share from the outset their ideas, reasoning behind proposed provisions, alternative options under discussion, and arguments both accepted and rejected. Oral discussions and expert consultations are undoubtedly important, but true depth of thought emerges only when it is set down in writing. Written arguments can be challenged, alternative views expressed, counter-arguments presented, and new evidence introduced. This process maximises the expertise available from the community and allows ideas to be tested through multiple rounds of substantive discussion, leading to their crystallisation. Publishing only the final text of proposed reforms does not constitute such discussion: in our view, debate should focus on ideas and reasoning, not merely on the wording of a final draft. We will gladly provide a platform for such publications, but even if they are hosted elsewhere, we will support them, as we believe that in any case the reform process will benefit.
