1. Introduction to Legal Empowerment

2. WHY LEGAL EMPOWERMENT? – The IDEAL
Injustices are supposed to be addressed by an effective legal system.
The law is supposed to be just, fair, and responsive to the needs of individuals, groups, and communities.

3. WHY LEGAL EMPOWERMENT? – The REALITY
Law is not always just.
Implementation of the law is not always fair.
In many cases, laws and legal processes can cause further injustices.
In many cases, the system works against disadvantaged individuals and communities.

4. WHY LEGAL EMPOWERMENT? – The REALITY
In 2008, the Commission on Legal Empowerment of the Poor reported that four billion people live outside the protection of the law.

5. WHY LEGAL EMPOWERMENT? – The GOAL
Marginalized groups (victims of injustices) must have the opportunity and ability to take action and effectively address their justice issues.
The direct participation of these groups and communities in asserting their rights is essential.

6. WHAT is LEGAL EMPOWERMENT?
Use of law and rights specifically to help increase disadvantaged populations’ control over their lives.
Golub and McQuay, Legal Empowerment: Advancing Good Governance and Poverty Reduction, in Law and Policy Reform at the Asian Development Bank (2001)

7. WHAT is LEGAL EMPOWERMENT?
A process of systemic change through which the poor and excluded become able to use the law, the legal system, and legal services to protect and advance their rights and interests as citizens.
Commission on Legal Empowerment of the Poor, Making the Law Work for Everyone: Volume One, Report of the Commission on Legal Empowerment of the Poor (2008).

8. people claim rights
people have the ability to use the law
people use the law to advance their rights and interests

9. LEGAL + EMPOWERMENT = LEGAL EMPOWERMENT
Which is the main word?
LEGAL or EMPOWERMENT?
Which is emphasized?
“USE OF LAW” or “ABILITY TO USE LAW”?
Is it a PROCESS or a GOAL?

10. USE the law SHAPE the law LEGAL EMPOWERMENT KNOW the law
Helping people, especially those who are victims of grave societal injustices, to have the capacity to:
KNOW the law
USE the law
SHAPE the law

11. KNOW the law USE the law SHAPE the law
SHAPE
the law

12. Change FROM TO Lack of knowledge, inaccessibility of information
Knowledge and critical understanding
Helplessness and inaction
Action - asserting rights, resisting violations (especially collective action)
Absence of responsive policies, presence of unjust policies
Responsive policies, more participatory policy making

13. Strategic shift FROM TO Legal aid or legal services Legal empowerment
People as beneficiaries or recipients of services
People as active seekers of justice, claimants of rights
Unresponsive (sometimes repressive) government
More accountable government

14. WHAT is LEGAL EMPOWERMENT?
FOCUS of LEGAL EMPOWERMENT:
Not on providing services, but on strengthening the capacity of people to act
Going beyond institutional support to courts and other government justice agencies, but prioritizing support to grassroots communities

15. WHAT is LEGAL EMPOWERMENT?
PERSPECTIVE of LEGAL EMPOWERMENT:
Not accepting the law as it is, but working towards institutional changes in policy and practice
Addressing individual cases, but focusing primarily on systemic injustices
Communities seen not as victims or beneficiaries, but as claimants of rights and active participants in the justice system

16. LEGAL EMPOWERMENT USE the law to address justice issues
Helping people, especially those who are victims of grave societal injustices, to have the capacity to:
KNOW (and understand) the law
USE the law to address justice issues
SHAPE the law to correct systemic injustices

17. AGREE or DISAGREE?
Legal Empowerment requires, as a pre-condition, a working justice system.

18. AGREE or DISAGREE?
The main reason for the training of community paralegals is to address the supply issue – the lack of lawyers.

19. AGREE or DISAGREE?
Legal Empowerment should be a sequence – starting with knowing the law, then using the law, then shaping the law?

20. AGREE or DISAGREE?
In Legal Empowerment, a key objective is to eliminate the need for lawyers.

21. AGREE or DISAGREE?
Legal Empowerment programs cannot be mainly initiated by governments.

22. SPECIAL ROLE OF COMMUNITY PARALEGALS
Grassroots paralegals are at the center of Legal Empowerment Programs
they are usually members of the communities directly affected by the justice issues
they understand the issues involved
they are more accessible to community members
they complement the work of lawyers and legal service NGOs

23. WHY COMMUNITY PARALEGALS?
Internal resource as opposed to external counsel
Response is more prompt
Action is more responsive
Practical in terms of cost
Focus is beyond individual cases
Approach is community-based

24. INTEGRATED APPROACH
Litigation, Mediation, Education, Negotiation, Legal Advice, Advocacy
Availing of multiple venues for resolution of justice issues
Multi-sectoral, connected to community- organizing and social movements

25. Can be Sequential
SHAPE
Law
USE Law
KNOW Law

26. Can be Cyclical
USE Law
SHAPE Law
KNOW Law

27. Interlocking gears?
Shape
Use
Know
How about this?

28. LEGAL EMPOWERMENT
easy as
1 2 3

29. easy as
1 2 3 ???

30. Making the Law Work for Everyone, Report of the Commission on Legal Empowerment of the Poor
If law is a barrier to the poor who wish to better their condition, if it is seen as an obstacle to dignity and security, then the idea of law as a legitimate institution will soon be renounced. If the law is accepted and understood as offering protection and equality of opportunity, and ensuring access to fair and neutral process, then the law will be revered as a foundation of justice.

31. Martin Luther King, Jr.
“But those who adhere to the method of nonviolent, direct action recognize that legislation and court orders tend only to declare rights – they can never thoroughly deliver them.
Only when the people themselves begin to act are rights on paper given lifeblood. Life is breathed into a judicial decision by the persistent exercise of legal rights until they become usual and ordinary in human experience.”
(The Case Against “Tokenism,”
New York Times Magazine, 5 August 1962)