The Commonwealth Law Conference is also held every two years, primarily for lawyers and judges. Again in Hong Kong, it was attended by seventeen Chief Justices and numerous other senior judges, advocates and lawyers from around the Commonwealth. The CLEA conference chooses to host its own conference in the same city in order to benefit from any overlapping delegates, and also to take advantage of the visiting judiciary to judge the biennial Commonwealth Moot. I was pleased to see Hertfordshire students representing the UK – the WINNERS were judged by three Chief Justices, a daunting task for any lawyer, let alone a student I’ve no doubt!
I was honoured to be able to give a presentation in the legal and judicial education stream, alongside Mark Bishop (ILEX) and Edward Chan SC (Hong Kong bar). Mark gave a reminder that legal education is not just HE – it is also FE and post-qualification in terms of CPD for lawyers and training for judges. Addressing competency standards and training, Mark gave insights into the registered status available to legal executives in Hong Kong, also mentioning comparative approaches in New Zealand as well as within the UK. He also addressed non-legally qualified tribunal appointments whereby knowledge and values must also be accompanied by robust and objective decision making in line with the Latimer House guidelines.
Edward Chan is the chair of specialist education for the Hong Kong bar association. He gave a historical summary of how lawyers qualified in Hong Kong. Prior to 1969, no legal education was available until the establishment of a 3 year LLB by the University of Hong Kong. Their first graduates saw the creation of a 1 year postgraduate certificate in law (PCLL), also devised by the university. A report commissioned by the government recommended that the LLB change to a 4 year course, which commenced in 2004. Their first cohort are now embarking on one of 3 PCLL courses run by different universities, but which have a substantial steer from the bar and law society. Interestingly, the PCLL typically has more overseas students than it does Hong Kong LLB graduates. It is possible to undertake a conversion examination in three particular modules: HK constitutional law, the HK legal system and HK land law (where certain peculiarities exist in relation to co-ownership which is possible without the use of trusts).
Discussion took place in relation to the current economic climate, and that some students would perhaps opt for the shorter 1 year bar pupillage rather than 2 years articling, as both are unpaid. That current UK graduates are being paid to delay starting their traineeships was also mentioned as the audience included the presidents of both the Scottish and England & Wales law societies.
The second Legal Education stream “Teaching Commonlaw Principles to non-English Mother Tongue Students” at CLC featured an inspiring talk from Joanne St Lewis (Ottawa). I expected this session to address the francophone province of Quebec, and possibly the dual primacy of the constitution in two languages (which it did, in part), but it also addressed the aboriginal customs and practices in Upper Canada. Because there is no cultural Inuit word or concept of ‘guilt’, then these persons are likely to plead guilty when asked, as a natural response with no understanding of their actions or meaning. Joanne gave good examples of how commonlaw principles and values have been mixed with local traditional values and customs in Upper Canada. Law was often used to eviscerate cultural practices during colonisation, yet Canada appears to have retained and integrated many of these.
Lastly, Nic Swart (director of the Law Society of South Africa) noted the 11 official languages of South Africa (a number only exceeded by India). Here, problems exist not only in interpretation, access to justice and an individual’s right for a court case to be conducted in a language that the person understands; but, there is also an issue for the courts. When giving judgment, the decision must be widely understood, not just by the parties but also by other equivalent and superior courts. Discussion ensued as to whether cultural education is required for both law student and the profession in terms of varying values and meanings – and whether it is acceptable or even ethical to chose one particular language in court due to, perhaps, a benefit in the interpretation or meaning that might not be available in other tongues.
For interest, the next CLEA and CLC will take place in Hyderabad in India, April 2011.
Recent Comments