Canadian Lawyer

November/December 2019

The most widely read magazine for Canadian lawyers

Issue link: https://digital.canadianlawyermag.com/i/1183528

Contents of this Issue

Navigation

Page 32 of 71

www.canadianlawyermag.com 33 ANNE REMPEL has not had a positive experience with self-regulation. She has made two complaints to a Canadian law society, but the process left her feeling the concerns were not entirely addressed by the "black box" system of lawyer discipline. "I think that's the one problem with lawyers regulating other lawyers: It gets into a bit of an echo chamber," says Rempel. In Rempel's case, she was trying to address how lawyers handle elder abuse — although she has since written about many issues facing self-represented litigants. While the law society was easier to deal with than some other professional regulators, she questions whether more levels of outside auditing are needed. "I think it's about addressing the issues that concern the public and in a timely manner," says Rempel, a retired engineer who has since moved to Australia. "Taking a smaller step earlier, rather than waiting for a big tribunal hearing and very punitive outcomes." Rempel is not the only onlooker asking how law societies serve the public interest. This year, Ontario's legal regulator faced increased scrutiny. The statement of principles requirement — a rule to make lawyers pledge support of diversity and inclusion — was dissected by media across the country, with commentary reaching a crescendo in mid-September. While the Law Society of Ontario leadership has done well to make its board meetings public and train an influx of new members, the statement of principles debate revealed issues in how the body discusses the public interest, says Rebecca Durcan, a lawyer whose practice focuses on professional regulation. "Unless you are a lawyer, and even if you are a lawyer, it was somewhat difficult sometimes to follow what was happening," says Durcan, who briefly served as a bencher last year. "I think it was concerning that members of the public and profession were left thinking, 'What is going on? What is being discussed here?'" Spectators filled Toronto's Osgoode Hall Convocation meetings this year to see how newly elected leaders would handle the statement of principles — a balance of free speech and promoting equality — in two days of seemingly relentless debate about diversity and inclusion. Dozens of lawyers fidgeted in the audience, by the end, as the 53 voting members jockeyed for their "I think it was concerning that members of the public and profession were left thinking, 'What is going on?'" Rebecca Durcan

Articles in this issue

Links on this page

Archives of this issue

view archives of Canadian Lawyer - November/December 2019