hacklink al hack forum organik hit kayseri escort deneme bonusu veren sitelercasibomartemisbetaqualandesenyurt escortgrandpashabetgrandpashabeturl shortenertambetholiganbetdeneme bonusuDeneme BonusuSoft2betdeyneyme boynuysuholiganbetjojobetswappedpadişahbetpadişahbet girişpadişahbetmatadorbetmeritbetKarşıyaka escort

TITLE OF THE ARTICLE: Attraction of Business and the Omission of Pro Bono Requirements from the Rules of Professional Conduct for Legal Practitioners in Nigeria: A Discussion

TITLE OF THE ARTICLE: Attraction of Business and the Omission of Pro Bono Requirements from the Rules of Professional Conduct for Legal Practitioners in Nigeria: A Discussion

AUTHOR:

MUHAMMED MUSTAPHA AKANBI, LL.B, LL.M, Ph.d (KCL, London), ACIarb (London), Professor of Law and Deputy Director, Centre for Research Development and In-House Training (CREDIT), University of Ilorin, Ilorin, Nigeria. Principal Partner, Forum Conveniens Consult, Firm of Legal Consultants and Arbitrators, 10A Abdulwahab Folawiyo (Unity) Road, Ilorin, Kwara State. This paper is a modified version of a discussion paper presented at the special session of the Academic Forum of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) on the theme: “What is wrong with the Rules of Professional Conduct for Legal Practitioners?” at the NBA, Annual Conference 25th – 30th August, 2013 at Tinapa Resort, Calabar, Nigeria.

ABSTRACT:

This article muses on the subject of ‘attraction of business’ and ‘pro bono requirements’ within and outside the Rules of Professional Conduct for Legal Practitioners (RPC 2007 and the draft RPC 2012) in Nigeria. With increasing complexities in the practice of law and changing technology, these two areas under consideration, which affect the practice of law in our country, appear to present daunting ethical challenges that threaten to swamp the best-intentioned guidelines. This article reveals that although there is regulation of advertisement in the legal profession, the emergence of the internet might have presented new dimensions and challenges. It further posits that the provisions on pro bono services in the Draft RPC 2012 does express a preference for providing legal representation to those who cannot afford to pay, but there is no mandatory language or enforcement mechanism behind that expression.

[READ ARTICLE HERE]

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Asyabahis Giriş Sekabet Sekabet Giriş Sekabet Sekabet Giriş Sekabet Sekabet Giriş sekabet sekabet giriş Sekabet Giriş