The Council of Advocates’ latest
initiative could, if seen out of context, appear comical. One of five committees
it has created is on ethics, and its new head is a lawyer portraying himself, in
pure Soviet style, as a concerned citizen seeking respite against bad language.
But it’s hard to laugh given that the committee he is to chair will be able to
propose disciplinary measures. Two further commissions will have the power to
strip lawyers of their licenses, a right that have been used a number of times
recently.
Andriy Tsykhankov, the anti-foul language
crusader, recently wrote a letter to the Council of Advocates expressing concern
over “infringements by some
advocates of the rules of professional ethics in their communications on the
Internet.”
Tsykhankov states that “a person who is not moral, who cannot be
restrained in communication with their opponent, cannot be a lawyer.”
Lest there be any misunderstanding, a “person who is not moral” in this case is not accused of downloading child pornography, inciting
racial enmity or slandering someone online. Tsykhankov’s letter from
April 17, 2013, was about members of the
profession who expressed critical views on various topics while using offensive
or foul language. Such comments, he claimed, “insult not only members of
the public, but also other advocates, political figures and representatives of
the authorities,” and that such people “cannot be lawyers.”
In recent months well over twenty legal
professionals, many with long and distinguished careers, have been stripped of
their licenses to practice or faced serious disciplinary proceedings. In all
cases they had used entirely unexceptional language to publically express
critical opinions. All those now under fire had been involved in an alternative
Congress of Advocates on November 17, 2012. This was attended by a number of delegations
from around the country who left the official congress in protest, asserting it
had been hijacked by a group of lawyers from Kyiv and Donetsk, and that
unidentified individuals were guarding the entrance and not admitting certain people.
The official congress, albeit with considerably depleted numbers, elected Lidia
Izovitova to head the National Association of Ukrainian Advocates. Izovitova
is a deputy head of the High Council of Justice, a body whose powers have been
considerably expanded since the judicial changes in July 2010. She is also rumored
to have strong backing from Andriy Portnov from the presidential administration.
Of particular concern is the case of
Mykola Siry, a senior researcher at the Koretsky Institute of State and Law. On
April 17 disciplinary proceedings were brought against him by the
Transcarpathian Qualification and Disciplinary Commission. His “unbefitting behaviour”
was publically stating the following:
“…as a lawyer I’d like to advise ordinary citizens to
be much more careful and alert after 20 November (when the new Criminal Procedure
Code came into force). In the new CPC there are stricter rules for police
reaction to minor offences which can now be qualified as criminal.” He suggested it was wise to always carry one’s internal passport,
especially out on the streets at night, and said that if detained, people should
approach a lawyer.
Now even if some media sources got it all
wrong and quoted him as saying that from Nov. 20 people have to have their
passports with them, the commission should consider what he actually said. What he expressed was clearly an
opinion based on his professional experience. It is an opinion not shared by
the main spokesperson for the new CPC – presidential advisor Portnov, but, like
it or not, one that in a democratic country he has a right to hold – and
express.
The fact that he faced disciplinary
measures over critical remarks is a worrying precedent, and surely intended to
be viewed as such. The message is clear: watch your step and keep your
head low. Now for those believing that one bastion of free speech remained –
keep a lid on what you say on the Internet. Big Brother is watching your
language.
