Georgia State University Law Review, Vol. 20, No.4,
Summer 2004
Florida International University Legal Studies Research Paper No. 08-16
PEGGY MAISEL, Florida
International University College of Law
Email: [email protected]
This
Article examines the system of educating and licensing attorneys in South
Africa to determine whether that country’s experience can provide guidance to
jurisdictions in the United States that are considering proposals to reduce or
eliminate the importance of bar examinations. The analysis set out here is
supplemented by a companion article, providing a first-hand account of the
South African system by Ms. Thuli Mhlungu, who was educated and sought
admission to the bar during the last years of apartheid and the early years of
the new democratic regime.
Examining the situation in South Africa makes particular sense because South
Africa is a country whose tortured history parallels the United States’ history
in many ways. Further, the South African system (1) has always required some
form of practical training prior to admission as an attorney; (2) expanded the
way to fulfill the practical training requirement ten years ago to include two
alternatives being considered in the United States - community service
apprenticeships and practical training courses; and (3) suffers from societal
problems similar to those of the United States, including under-representation
of people of color within the legal profession and inadequate resources to
provide access to justice for indigent persons.
Any analysis of how helpful a consideration of the South African history of bar
licensure can be for jurisdictions in the United States initially requires an
understanding of the structure of that country’s bar, its system of legal
education, the historical method it used for licensing law graduates, and the
racial composition of its bar. Part I of this Article sets out this historical
framework. After providing that historical information, Part II discusses the
post-apartheid changes to bar admissions, the rationale for those changes, and
how successful they have been. Part III examines key issues jurisdictions in
the United States will face if they try to institute a parallel system.
Finally, Part IV offers a suggestion for how U.S. jurisdictions might try to
duplicate the successes achieved in South Africa.
For any folks invested in more and better resident contribution, that is a knock back, i believe. But strangely enough, the newest one-pager Can involve many responsibilities around consultation.
Posted by: Belstaff Jackets | November 26, 2011 at 01:15 AM