1. Promoting Pro Bono Among Lawyers and Law Students: Lessons to Learn from Experiences in Poland and the United States (Including Mandatory Pro Bono in New York) LIUBOU KRASNITSKAYA Legal Clinics Foundation, Poland PAULA GALOWITZ New York University School of Law, U.S. SUSAN KAY Vanderbilt University School of Law, U.S.

2. Agenda  Welcome and Orientation of Participants to the Concurrent Session  Brief Overview  Presentation on the Polish Experience  Presentation on Mandatory Pro Bono for Lawyers in New York and California  Student Pro Bono Activities in the United States  Reactions to the Presentations 2

3. Agenda (continued)  Small Group Discussions  Opportunities for Promoting Pro Bono in each of our jurisdictions  Challenges for Promotion Pro Bono in each of our jurisdictions  Large Group Synthesis of the Small Group  Observations  Reflections/ Take-Aways 3

4. Presentation on the Polish Experience 4 Why is pro bono important? Legal aid Pro bono

5. Law regulations 5 According to the law regulations legal aid ( state subsidizes ) is provided since a case has been submitted to court. Vulnerable people can not receive free of charge legal help on a pre-trial level Ethical Code doesn’t require pro bono work from lawyers

6. Pro Bono Lawyer Award 6 Since 2004 a non-governmental organisation and a Polish national daily newspaper organise annually a national-level content Lawyer Pro Bono

7. Members of the Jury President and Justices of the Constitutional Tribunal Ombudsman Ministry of Justice President of the Supreme Court President of Supreme Administrative Court President of the Bar association President of Legal Advisers Council Former winners 7

8. Awards 8 10 editions 253 lawyers were nominated ( amount of nominated lawyers is limited by rules ) 10 winners and 27 outstanding candidates About 36 000 lawyers in the country

9. 9

10. Promotion via Clearinghouse Centrum Pro Bono serves as a gateway for NGOs to the professional legal resources and, on the other hand, is the main pro bono cases provider to the law firms.

11. Annual reports with pro bono matters 11

12. Ranking of law firms based on: - income -amount of lawyers - best results in law branches - pro bono work (since 2008) 12

13. Pro Bono Law Firm Award №yearLaw firm Pro bono matters in clearinghouse 12008Hogan & Hartson10 22009Clifford Chance13 32010Gide Loyrette Nouel32 42011Wierzbowski Eversheds21 52012Skoczyński Wachowiak Strykowski10 62013Leśnodorski, Ślusarek i Wspólnicy14 13

14. Mandatory Pro Bono for Lawyers in New York  On May 1, 2012 (what is Law Day in New York), the Chief Judge of New York State (Jonathan Lippman) announced a new initiative to provide additional legal services to expand access to justice for low- income New Yorkers  As announced then, beginning in 2013, prospective lawyers will be required to spend 50 hours performing pro bono work as a requirement for admission to practice law in New York State 14

15. Mandatory Pro Bono in New York (cont.)  The pro bono requirement has multiple purposes  In addition to easing the gap in legal assistance, another goal is to provide instructive and meaningful experiences to law students that will expose them to the pressing needs of the less fortunate  This will instill a deeper understanding of the problems confronted by those segments of society that have little access to legal resources and institutions 15

16. Mandatory Pro Bono in New York (cont.)  These pro bono experiences hopefully will encourage law students to continue with volunteer pro bono services after they are admitted, and help offer them a different perspective  Lawyers acquire hands-on skills under the supervision of committed members of the legal profession 16

17.  The Judge created an Advisory Committee to implement the requirement; then approved by the Administrative Board of New York courts and adopted by the New York State Court of Appeals (highest court in New York) as part of rule for admission of lawyers to practice in New York  Applies to all who seek admission to practice in New York after January 1, 2015 (must fulfill the 50 hour requirement before filing application for admission, but not before taking the bar) 17

18.  “Qualifying pro bono work”  Can be done in another state or country  Must be law-related Enhance provision of legal resources available to person otherwise not able to access or afford legal assistance Seek to do pro bono work with programs or entities that aim to improve access to justice, are engaged in representation of low-income or disadvantaged individuals or provide government services in furtherance of these objectives 18

19.  Work must be performed under supervision of:  Member of law school faculty, including adjunct faculty, or instructor employed by a law school;  Lawyer admitted to practice and in good standing with bar in jurisdiction in which work performed; or  If clerkship or externship in court system, by judge or lawyer employed by the court system 19

20.  Examples  Law school clinics that provide legal assistance to those unable to afford representation  OK if get academic credit for the clinic work  Non-for-profit providers of legal services for poor and low-income individuals  Law firm if pro bono matter and client not paying a fee  Judge or court system  Federal, state or local government agency or legislative body 20

21.  Other Steps to Increase Access to Justice in New York  Expansion of pro bono in New York this month when Judge Lippman announced a rule change that allows lawyers who work for big corporation in New York but are not licensed to practice law in the state to do pro bono New York is 4 th state to let out-of-state lawyers working as counsel to corporations to offer their services to the poor 21

22.  Law firms are required to file biannual reports showing how much charitable work they have done  Creation of Task Force to Expand Access to Civil Legal Services  Since 2010 hold annual hearings and create reports; In initial 2010 Report the Task Force proposed a multi-year plan to allocate funding within the Judiciary budget for New Yorkers in all areas of the state living at or below 200% of the federal poverty level ($46,100 in annual income for a family of four in 2012) 22

23.  In fiscal year 2012-13, $25 million awarded  Currently $55 million in the state budget ($15 for IOLA funding and $40 million from court appropriations) 23

24. California Pro Bono Requirement  Similar to New York in that the applicant for the California bar must also complete 50 hours of pro bono work  Different than New York in that the hours can be completed during the first year of practice and do not have to be completed before the applicant is sworn into the bar 24

25. Why Should We Require Pro Bono for Applicants When it is Not Required for Lawyers or Law Students?  Model Rule of Professional Conduct 6.1: recommends that all attorneys engage in pro bono but does not require it.  Standards for the Accreditation of Law Schools requires that law schools provide opportunities for pro bono but do not require that students participate. 25

26. ABA Model Rule 6.1 Every lawyer has a professional responsibility to provide legal services to those unable to pay. A lawyer should aspire to render at least (50) hours of pro bono publico legal services per year. In fulfilling this responsibility, the lawyer should: (a) provide a substantial majority of the (50) hours of legal services without fee or expectation of fee to: (1) persons of limited means or (2) charitable, religious, civic, community, governmental and educational organizations in matters that are designed primarily to address the needs of persons of limited means; and (b) provide any additional services through: (1) delivery of legal services at no fee or substantially reduced fee to individuals, groups or organizations seeking to secure or protect civil rights, civil liberties or public rights, or charitable, religious, civic, community, governmental and educational organizations in matters in furtherance of their organizational purposes, where the payment of standard legal fees would significantly deplete the organization's economic resources or would be otherwise inappropriate; (2) delivery of legal services at a substantially reduced fee to persons of limited means; or (3) participation in activities for improving the law, the legal system or the legal profession. In addition, a lawyer should voluntarily contribute financial support to organizations that provide legal services to persons of limited means. 26

27. Standards for Accreditation at U.S. Law Schools  A law school shall offer substantial opportunities for student participation in pro bono activities 27

28. For and Against Mandatory Pro Bono  Pro Lawyers have a monopoly on access to one branch of government It is the right thing to do Practicing law is a privilege There is a huge unmet need for legal services 28

29. 29  Anti It is imposed servitude which is outlawed by the US Constitution You don’t want lawyers representing clients when the lawyers are resentful It violates the market economy

30. Two Sources for Information about Pro Bono in Other Jurisdictions 1.Directory of “A Survey of Pro Bono Practices Directory of “A Survey of Pro Bono Practices and Opportunities in 71 Jurisdictions” prepared by Latham & Watkins LLP for the Pro Bono Institute (August 2012) * Countries covered are in Europe, Asia and the Pacific region, the Americas, Africa and the Middle East 30

31.  Survey part of ongoing effort of many many law firms, organizations and corporate legal departments to promote and stimulate the growth of pro bono representation  The chapters describe, for each jurisdiction, what access-to-justice or publicly funded legal aid programs exist, what unmet needs for legal representation 31

32. remain, what perceptions or culture shape the discussion of pro bono, and what professional conduct laws and rules provide the framework for pro bono representation.  Survey can be found at: http://www.probonoinst.org/projects/global-pro- bono/global-pro-bono-atlas/ 32

33. 2. Globalization, Lawyers and Emerging Economies (GLEE)  Founding institutional members of GLEE are Harvard Law School and the University of Wisconsin Law School  GLEE project operates as a consortium of individuals and institutions  Investigates impact of globalization on corporate legal sector in major emerging economies 33

34.  As part of a comprehensive study of lawyers in emerging economies, the GLEE Pro Bono project is undertaking empirical studies of corporate pro bono in three emerging economies: India, China and Brazil Information about GLEE is available at:  http://www.law.harvard.edu/programs/plp/ pages/glee.php 34

35. Reactions to the Presentations 35

36. Small Group Discussions Opportunities for promoting pro bono in each of our jurisdictions Challenges for promotion of pro bono in each of our jurisdictions 36

37. Large Group Synthesis of the Small Group Observations Ideas from the small group discussions Ways to promote pro bono 1. In Minnesota, NGO puts volunteer lawyers together with clients in need of legal assistance; the NGO provides the infrastructure 2. Nigerian Constitution provides every indigent criminal defendant with the lawyer of his/her choice 3. Have collaborations amongst lawyers, NGOs and universities; having partners makes it easier 4. Increase awareness of rights/opportunities 5. Include timely training in law school 37

38. 6. Have list of lawyers willing to take pro bono cases 7. Cultural and structural issues—have matching between legal skills and and specialties of lawyers and needs of clients 8. Have a low bono group for those who don’t qualify for legal services but can’t pay full price; lawyers take case for a small percentage of the normal charge 9. Encourage students and give a large number of credits for clinical work 10. Show importance of pro bono requirement 38

39. 11) Match new lawyers doing pro bono with experienced lawyers 12) Highlight gains (personal and professional) for doing pro bono work * Let lawyer experience the “feel good” of doing pro bono Challenges 1. Some countries have minimum fees for legal services and clients must pay 2. In some countries, cannot be a full-time employee of state or university and provide legal assistance * Prevents supervision of law students in clinical education 39

40. 3. Stigma amongst some lawyers that pro bono work is “wasting time” those fees 4. There is a big gap between the law on the books and law in action 5. Hard to talk about “the profession”—different challenges for big law firms and small law firms 6. There can be opposition from the bar; mandatory equals “bad” 40

41. 7. Pro bono can be an excuse to provide a broken system; rely on pro bono instead of fixing the underlying system * A band-aid approach 8. Can be a conflict if a lawyer provides services to those eligible for legal aid * In those situations, lawyers can provide pro bono for NGOs 41

42. Reflections/ Take-Aways 42

43. Thank You Please feel free to contact us; we’d love to hear your thoughts about the workshop.  Liubou Krasnitskaya (domovo4ka@tut.by)  Paula Galowitz (paula.galowitz@nyu.edu)  Susan Kay (susan.kay@vanderbilt.edu) 43