Jump to content

Leaderboard


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 05/19/19 in all areas

  1. 16 points
    I did the LPP. It's an 8 month program (Late August to Late April). You spend 3 weeks in-person at Ryerson (last week August, second week October, and mid-December) and the rest of the 4 months is done online via a 4 or 5 persons virtual law firm with a supervising lawyer. You have two supervising lawyers in the program. One from late August to mid-October and the second from mid-October to mid-December (when the classroom component ends). You complete work in many areas of law including business, administrative, criminal, civil litigation, wills and estates, real estate, family, construction, and professional responsibility. It is the best preparation if you want to be a sole practitioner or run your own law firm someday. You learn practice management skills and docket your hours daily. You do real legal work in the program (in a mock environment of course), so I think it could be better than a lot of articling positions out there that have you only doing research and fetching Joe's coffee. Personally, I think it's too many areas of law to cover in just a 4 month time period. And as someone who went to a Canadian law school and did practicals in law school, I didn't find this component to be as beneficial as others who never worked in a practical legal environment and wanted to brush up on their Canadian law in various areas. If you know that you want to do business or criminal for example, you might find it frustrating to have to learn family, admin, civil, etc. Now, let's come to the real juice that everyone wants to know about - the placements. In the first or second week of July, the LPP will release a list of summer employers you can apply to (around 40-60 positions total). They hold interviews in mid-August. These positions are harder to get because there are 230-250 students applying for them. The remaining positions will trickle out throughout August-December. Almost all of them are paid, but what the LPP doesn't tell you is that almost none hire back and they pay $15/hr - so minimum wage. There are in-house corporations, major banks, some Biglaw firms, government, general firms, soles, etc. Overall, I'd say 70-80% of the placements are paid, but most pay minimum wage or close to it. I did not have a problem with this though since it is only for 4 months (for most people at least). Here is the biggest catch all though with the LPP placements. You must accept all interviews and must accept your first offer received (they encourage you to apply broadly so that you can ensure you secure a position). So it does not matter if your dream job in New York comes calling a day later if Joe's General Firm in the middle of nowhere offers you a position first. Failure to abide by the LPP rules may result in serious consequences, including not being allowed to apply for further placement employers or completing the program. You can see the list of employers for the previous years here - http://www.lpp.ryerson.ca/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/LPP-Program-Overview-Candidate-Feb-2019b.pdf (pages 8-17). The best placements are highly competitive to land of course. This past year we had heavy competition for the financial institutions and corporations, government, and Blakes. The split in the program is around 60-40 - foreign law school graduates to Canadian law school graduates. Many of the foreign trained lawyers in the program have extensive work experience and credentials; there were law professors, MBA graduates and PhDs and many whom have practiced law in other countries prior to coming to Canada. The LPP is the path of least resistance for them (like how OCIs and articling recruit are the path of least resistance for Canadian law students). You often hear about Canadian law school grads in the program complaining about how the placement rate was not what they expected. It's because they were not competitive candidates, to begin with, and are now competing with foreign trained law graduates who have years of experience on them. Employers view the Canadian who went to Bond very differently from that person who was born and raised in the Middle East or Asia, went to law school there, and maybe even practiced law. I hustled and landed something pretty great in the program and was also hired back by my employer. Most of my peers were not so fortunate and most placement employers do not hire back their students because to them it's akin to a co-op program and the in-house teams are small and hire experienced lawyers generally (from the Biglaw firms). The program is what you make of it like anything else. I would definitely take a good, paid articling job over the LPP program (10-12 months articling is better than a 4 month placement in my strong opinion); however, the LPP program is a solid alternative if you want to take a chance and don't have good articling prospects. Anyone want further information about the program, feel free to PM me.
  2. 15 points
    You didn't even look for articles?!? Because it was took much work and no one would offer you a guarantee? Holy hell. Look. It's possible to go through the LPP system and come out on the other side okay, but you've got to be willing to hustle. You've got to want it. And by the sounds of things, you can't even be bothered to an ordinary degree, much less an extraordinary degree. Articles are a job. You apply to them, you get interviews, you may or may not get hired afterwards. That's the employment market, for everyone who isn't rich or guaranteed a spot in the family business where Uncle Larry won't fire you no matter how much you suck. Everyone else puts in the effort, without any guarantee of outcomes, and accepts that's life. Without being any harsher than I've already been, you need to get your priorities straightened out. Because there won't be a job waiting for you on the other side of this, no matter how you go about it. What you do is stop sitting on your ass, and hustle. Because I guarantee most of your competition is doing so, and no one wants to hire the guy (or gal) who can't be bothered doing shit on their own, because it seems like too much effort.
  3. 12 points
    From the Law Society of BC Website: "Neither the articled student nor the principal should terminate articles without a report from each party being made to the Law Society and, unless the termination was by mutual agreement of you and your principal, the matter will be referred to the Credentials Committee.
  4. 12 points
    I wanna meet the person who scored 180 and decided to write the LSAT again. Must have an interesting life story.
  5. 12 points
    Called in 2012, working as a lawyer in the public sector. Really couldn't have hoped for things to be better at this stage in my career. Total compensation is around $146K (that figure includes pension and health benefits). Work-life balance is quite reasonable - occasional evening and weekend work but rarely anything that interferes with other plans. The work is consistently interesting and has a meaningful impact. My colleagues are fantastic. That said, I have been fortunate in a lot of ways: I got an articling position at my top choice employer, starting immediately after law school. My law school grades were probably around the median so that's hardly guaranteed. After articling I was hired back. Only about 30% of my articling class was hired back (although I suppose some may have chosen not to). When it felt like the right time for a change in my work, there were internal opportunities available for a move. I have not been disadvantaged by racism or sexism. Certainly knowing the outcome I got, I absolutely would become a lawyer again. That said it's easy to imagine things turning out very differently, so I'm not going to turn my experience into a general recommendation to others.
  6. 11 points
    This forum is meant to assist lawyers and articling students, you are neither. It is not acceptable for you to give bad professional advice and contradict senior members of the bar of BC.
  7. 11 points
    I think that many of you imagine that employers conduct a far more detailed investigation and comparison of grades during the hiring process than they actually do.
  8. 11 points
    Got admitted today 3.63/156. Will be accepting.
  9. 11 points
    This is one of those times when it's best not to be so damn sure about something that you clearly know little about.
  10. 11 points
    1. Accept Osgoode and withdraw from Queens. 2. Forfeit your deposit and learn why next September while you're taking 1L contracts at Osgoode.
  11. 10 points
    My fourth year was so full of bird courses I could have been an ornithologist.
  12. 9 points
    Nope - they said she terminated- by not working. Its not really relevant who did what first - still needs to go the Law Society. Articling is a commitment - from both. Neither gets out of it easy.
  13. 9 points
    This is a terrifying thread. Read Halsbury's or Hogg or another textbook. Don't rely on freaking law students' summaries and outlines of their law school courses FOR PRACTICE.
  14. 9 points
    I spoke to a French woman in admissions on the phone who told me "I need to be more patient"
  15. 9 points
    Duuuude (or duuuuudette), your diagnostic score was higher than what half the people who actually wrote the test got on the specific LSAT you did your diagnostic on. A 151 on your diagnostic is something you should be very proud of! Whoever told you that most people improve only a couple points doesn't know what the hell they are talking about and if assault were legal, I would have slapped them in the face. A diagnostic of 151 puts you in a VERY good position to hit the 160s because this is a VERY learnable test. 20-25 hours a week seems like a pretty solid amount as long as you're studying efficiently. The main thing that improved my score drastically is looking at the wrong answers and really trying to figure out why I got it wrong and why LSAC's answer was better than mine. Nevertheless, it is just as important to look at your correct answers and figure out why you got those questions correct. This is of course done after you've gone through some prep material. My advice would be to start with trying to improve on LG since that's the easiest section to learn and then move on to LR where the bulk of the marks are. Don't feel discouraged if RC takes a long time to improve because that's the hardest section to improve on... heck I barely improved on RC and yet still had a 15 point increase from my diagnostic because I became a lot better at LG and LR. I ended up getting a 166 on the LSAT and guess what my diagnostic score was? You do the math
  16. 9 points
    No one is upset by facts, but dude, I was already rejected, so no need to restate that my stats aren't good enough. I feel like what was abrasive about your post didn't need an explanation, but based on your history on this forum you seem to have a tough time interacting with people in a non-offensive way. Definitely something to work on during your time at law school. Best of luck to you, clevermoose.
  17. 9 points
    I don't want to get into the specific details of the situation under discussion, but I want to make a general point about how students so often misread the employment market, and this is a great example of how that happens. Applying for a job is not the same as applying for admission to a program at school. It's not the same as applying for an award. It's not the same as applying for accommodation for the LSAT, or from some office at your school. In all of those other cases and examples, the people considering you for admission, awards, accommodation, etc. are all concerned about being fair and objective. In all of those cases, the process matters, and everyone agrees it matters. This is not to say that bias and subjectivity are entirely eliminated. It happens, sometimes, and it's unavoidable. But the process is at least designed to avoid it and everyone agrees that's the way it should be. An employer doesn't care about any of that. They just need to get the job done. At a large employer you may have at least some cushioning from the immediate realities of the workplace if a decision is being made in a formal HR process. But even there, they're aware of the realities. At a smaller employer, it's completely in your face at all times. Speaking as an employer, if I'm looking at a candidate who has a sympathetic situation at home, I'm not thinking "what a shame they couldn't show their full potential in school" I'm thinking "how often is this going to fuck me in the future if I hire this person?" Now you can all yell and scream that I'm a terrible person for thinking this. But I have very few people to rely on. And everything my employee isn't getting done is one more problem for me, personally, to solve. And I don't imagine there's a single employer out there who is saintly enough to just ignore that factor and to hire the more "deserving" candidate, even though there's a fair chance the more deserving candidate is going to make their own personal and professional lives suck over an extended period of time. If you can't understand what I just wrote, or you think it's somehow wrong, it's because you're still thinking like a kid. You imagine the world owes you things, and it doesn't. I'm going to hire someone who will help me do my job and make me money. I'm not a social agency. I may feel personal sympathy for certain factors in your life. And I'm not saying I'm going to turf an existing employee the second they have health or family problems. But you think I'm going to willingly create that situation for myself if I don't have to? You're insane. I don't have a perfect answer for how to navigate the marketplace if you are dealing with factors like that. But if you at least maintain the appropriate attitude towards what's really going on, you'll do a better job of sounding reasonable, mature, and realistic about it. You never, ever, ever want to sound like "here's why I haven't been able to perform, so please take this into account when evaluating my poor performance." You want to sound like "here's everything I am doing and will continue to do to ensure that my personal issues aren't stopping me from getting the job done, and done well." It isn't a perfect answer. There is no perfect answer. But at least you won't sound like a kid who thinks that the coach has to play every player on the team just to be fair - even the ones who suck. The real world just isn't like that.
  18. 9 points
    I've wanted to answer this question sooner, but I have two predominant reactions. First, I realize that it's been a long time since I met many new people outside of a context that's at least semi-professional. I don't find myself standing around house parties anymore, drinking a beer in a circle of people I've just met, going "so, what is it you do?" Maybe ten years ago I could have cited a string of experiences relating to how people respond to my profession. But not anymore. I actually find myself digging for examples of how anyone new has responded to my job in a long time. My second reaction is, I actually met two new people on the weekend (friends of my wife's family) and most of the time I spent talking with this guy who runs an arts organization. Interesting guy. In some very tangential way what he does and what I do could intersect at some point, and we exchanged cards. It really wasn't a thing at all that I practice law, or that I'm in criminal defence. Although he sat on an interesting jury lately, and without going into specifics (which he can't do) we had an interesting chat about that experience. I guess what I'm saying it, for good or for ill, at some point your social environment narrows a bit and you self-select into relationships with people for whom your job just isn't a big deal. It's useful to simply be a lawyer at times - in politics, in certain professional settings, etc. Half of that is also just having any professional job and being a middle-aged dude in a suit. I don't know if there's a good lesson out of this. It's a very important exercise to remain conscious of how other people respond to you, how you respond to others, etc. Perception and privilege are huge factors at play, here. It's not like saying "I'm a lawyer" is a thing that occurs without context. When I say that, the most common reaction (based on dress, deportment, environment, etc.) is "oh, yeah." But try saying that as a young woman of colour. You'll get a different reaction. And since we aren't going to somehow eliminate bias, privilege, etc. any time soon, the next best option is at least remaining aware of how it all plays out. But yeah, it's a thing for a while. It's weird to think "this is who I am now, and it's how people see me." Then one day, you wake up and it's just normal because that's who you are. Like any life change - getting older, having kids, finding yourself in some unexpected position of authority - it's odd until it isn't. Though I'll admit, I still have moments when I think "I can't believe they let me do this stuff - if only they really knew me." But I've come around to the view that everyone has those moments too, or should. The Pope, the Secretary-General of the UN, our Prime Minister - I truly hope and believe they all have moments when they think "I can't believe they're letting me do this!" I'm sure Trump doesn't have that level of self-reflection. He probably thinks it makes sense that he's President. But that's a whole other issue.
  19. 8 points
    Hey all, First, shout outs to all the previous guys who’ve done this. Second, as is the trend, here’s a mega thread for all you greasy incoming 1Ls. Feel free to post any questions you have about Osgoode, studying habits, living in North York, etc. Whatever you want. You can also PM me if you don’t want to post anything here. [Mod edit: last year’s thread is here]
  20. 8 points
    Yeah DO NOT terminate at this point. You would be doing your employer a huge favour that they do not deserve. And yourself a massive disservice. I know we are not getting the whole story (and you shouldn’t post it here) but my understanding is only your ACTUAL principal can fire you, and it is a huge headache for him to try. Like definitely not worth his time. Better to cut his losses, let you finish PLTC without calling on you, and departing the relationship there. - At least, this would be my view were I he. Reach out to actual senior counsel you can get guidance from. Like a bencher. It is literally what they are here for. I know it is intimidating but time to act like an adult professional in charge of your career, not a scared student worried about how it all “looks”. Fuck how it looks - you need to get Called, and focusing on your PLTC is part of that widely understood hurdle.
  21. 8 points
    Just got in off the waitlist! I am literally shaking. cGPA: 3.65 LSAT: 162 To all the people who think their stats are too mediocre: Don't lose hope!❤️
  22. 8 points
    Articling student: Hello, LSBC? I'm an articling student with a question regarding articles and termination. LSBC: Fuck you, how dare you contact us for such a wildly invalid reason!
  23. 8 points
  24. 8 points
    No, it actually really is.
  25. 8 points
    Just about 6 years post-call; yes, I'd say that I'm satisfied. I spent 3 years in a firm (including articles), and just about 4 years in-house at a public corporation. I get to do work in a niche area that I find interesting (including working in US for periods of time). Income is six figures, not including DC pension, share purchase plan, and some other good benefits. No, I'd probably be a vet because I really animals. But I don't regret my decision. Also, if I was a vet, I'd prob want to be a lawyer. So it goes.
  26. 8 points
    I'm a she. And, unlike you, I've done a LLB/JD, LLM, and an actual doctorate.
  27. 8 points
    You're not a lawyer so I'll forgive you for using words like "illegal" without knowing that this isn't illegal, but don't get in the habit of speaking about legal realities of things you do not know about. It's bad form for a student/prospective student, it is worse for a lawyer. Suffice to say, unpaid articling or less than minimum wage is not "illegal" for articling students. Moving on, you again are not lawyer, so to say that what an articling student should be making is "1/3 of the work you can bill" is ludicrous. That may be a benchmark an associate should consider, but that's not an articling student consideration. Articling students are there to learn, they aren't meant to be profit centres, even though firms can derive value from their practice. If someone was looking to article and wanted 1/3 of what they billed, (a) I'd probably laugh, and (b) you're a student who has no control over billings - it's a terrible idea for benchmarking your pay. I'll let someone else who is in a smaller firm or has dealt with this situation weigh in for OP since in my world, everyone gets paid, and gets paid a decent amount per week, but I would strongly suggest that the OP ignore the entire post I'm quoting.
  28. 7 points
    Accepted this afternoon! Saw ‘Admitted’ via uoZone, but I have not received an email yet. However, I can download my letter of acceptance from uoZone. I have also received an email about OSAP application from uOttawa. Deadline to accept this offer is July 9th. I have applied under Access Category. Stats are: 3.78 CGPA, 3.84 L2, 157 LSAT (an accommodated score), MA in History (A- average), currently doing combined Master programs of archival studies and museum studies (3.58 in accordance with the OLSAS scale), and very social justice-oriented ECs, i.e. volunteer at LGBTQ archives and participation in labour movements. Although I have been provisionally accepted to Windsor law and I am really fond of the law school, I think that uOttawa law will be better for my interest as I wish to engage in legal issues in cultural institutions such as archives and museums. Ottawa has Library and Archives Canada and tons of museums! I will accept this offer from uOttawa law. I have been currently wait listed at Osgoode and Western law, but I do not think that I would have any chances of getting in there. It seems to me that uOttawa law will be my final destination; I am so so happy with the acceptance to this great law school!
  29. 7 points
    Okay, your “principal” is seriously misbehaving and the law society is the best contact point to start with. There are rules to the relationship. Send an email clarifying that you are not quitting and never intended to give him that impression, just so that is perfectly clear. EDIT: speak to your actual principal!!!! They should be heavily involved in this mixup and if they aren’t yet, enlighten them. If that doesn’t clear it up, you need to contact the bencher you already met with during your articles to seek direction. There are strict rules in play here and I am guessing your “principal” doesn’t regularly have students and doesn’t realize that.
  30. 7 points
    Now that the Raptors have made the finals, I am more than satisfied. ; )
  31. 7 points
  32. 7 points
    Yes I am satisfied with life, 9 years out of law school. In addition to work I make a real effort to stay connected with old friends and attend social events. I’m happy with my income, over 200, but I work too much. I advise people not to do it for the money but can’t take my own advice. Doing litigation problems keep coming up and people keep throwing money at me to fix those problems. I measure money in terms of the vacations it could buy but I just never get around to taking the vacation. I don’t think I’d choose to be a lawyer again given a second life because I’ve already done it. I’ve accomplished pretty much everything I set out to do, other than argue before the SCC. But if I went back in time of course I would do it again because I needed money and liked to argue. Other jobs I may have been happier in include actor or musician. I guess it’s not too late to switch.
  33. 6 points
    Please include Western schools. Us Westerners don't appreciate Ontario-centrism(in politics or law school stats)
  34. 6 points
    I blame Ford. I blame her. I blame chief of staff, Michael Wilson. I blame Joseph Hillier. I blame everyone who works at the AGO, who, rather than trying to modernize the administration of justice in Ontario, managed to erode justice for the most vulnerable, while realizing an absolutely minuscule amount of savings.
  35. 6 points
    Mulroney is such an embarrassment. Why do we have to be governed by these morons? It's depressing as hell.
  36. 6 points
    So was my cousin’s first partner. Funny how beliefs change when it’s time to divide the matrimonial assets.
  37. 6 points
    I eagerly await the day that a poster named @NeverGiveUp informs someone that it is impossible, and urges them to give up.
  38. 6 points
    ...a lawyer doesn't need to spend 20k to understand the new realities of corporate regulation, nor will an academic pursuit help a lawyer with practice management.
  39. 6 points
    God save the Queen(s)
  40. 6 points
    I am confused as to why possibly improved access to the Toronto market is that big an advantage. The Calgary/Alberta market is also big and not quite as competitive. Paying $30,000+ to have access to something you don't want is foolish and silly. I went to UofA even though I got into UBC. I am currently practicing at a litigation boutique in downtown Vancouver. I know quite a few people from my class who are working in Vancouver. The number of people in my law school class who even applied to Toronto was minuscule.
  41. 6 points
    I just called uOttawa admissions and was told "offers are still going out on a rolling basis, you could hear anytime between today and the end of June" when I asked about the waitlist I was told "it could come out in 2 days or 2 weeks" not much help but thought I would share!
  42. 6 points
    You've asked several questions here which are not the same question, though you may feel they are. When did they finalize the move? I have no idea. I don't know nearly enough to imagine even having an answer to that, and neither do you. You I have given you more notice? I can't possibly know that without knowing all of what was going on. So, unknowable. Were you treated fairly? Yes. They gave you an articling position, and you have completed that position. No one promised you any more than that, and regardless of whatever else is happening, you got everything you were promised. To the questions you haven't asked, it's May 31 and you imagined that somehow you had a sorta promise to stay employed where you are, even though you explicitly asked about it and no one confirmed anything at all like hireback. If anyone fooled you, you fooled yourself. Based on that description of this practice, I'm sure you were told when you took the job that nothing at all was guaranteed going forward, and they likely could not or would not hire you back. So really, you had ample warning. Stow away your sense of grievance and move on. It won't help you going forward. Try to stay on good terms with everyone concerned, because that's all you can still control that will do you any good in the future. Good luck.
  43. 6 points
    🙌🙌😭 WOOHOOO (I'm freaking out as I'm typing this) I just got in off waitlist!!!! I was #10 as of May 16th, my stats are cGPA: 3.86/4.33 (with drops) LSAT: 160 Uvic is my top choice so I will be 100% accepting! Fingers crossed for those who are still waiting, there's some movement happening for sure!
  44. 6 points
    Your grades are not an indication that you should not practice law. But I would encourage you to articulate, right now if you can, exactly where and what kind of law you wish to practice. Because I (and others) will be able to give you more intelligent feedback after you've done that. And if you can't describe what you want your career to look like, over and above just "practicing law" then we might have a real problem. But maybe you can, so let's try that first. I always get concerned when people immediately talk about 1L OCIs because the sort of employer that participates in 1L OCIs at all is only a part of the total marketplace. If you genuinely want to practice law in a large, business-oriented firm then we can talk about that. In that conversation, your grades are going to be a problem, so maybe students who've been through that and who practice in that kind of environment can talk about it. That wouldn't be me. But there are also quite a number of employers out there for whom it's far more important to have clear background and interest in their area of practice than it is to come with the best possible grades. Which is why it dismays me when someone posts something like this, tosses in an off-hand reference to OCIs, and then asks what they should do next. Let me put it another way. Next to grades, the absolute most important thing in the employment market is to be able to explain what you want to do, and why, and to show some evidence that your interest in that area of practice is genuine. So what's your situation, there?
  45. 6 points
    All that's been said so far is correct. Seasoned lawyers don't give much thought to your law school because they evaluate competence based on your body of work not your law school entry stats. Canada doesn't have any "bad" law schools, but prospective law students, current law students, new calls and people outside the profession tend to understand this a little differently. They know that things generally can be ranked and the more status obsessed ones want to know where law school X ranks regardless of whether that question makes much sense or is determinative of anything. So, 10 years ago Macleans gives us an answer and the rest as they say is history. So let's get to Ottawa. I think the school's reputation tends to be neutral because no one's quite sure what to make of it. Note that Maclean's ranked them higher than Western in that initial list, but this only adds to the confusion since no one I've talked to seems to actually believe it is. Look, all things being equal, students look to a law school's admission average to determine whether a school is "prestigious" or not first, and if you get a tie - which sometimes you do, they'll turn to the desirability of its location. We could get into the reputation of the faculty, the types of courses offered, or the area of law the schools specialize in, but imo with the exception of UofT and Osgoode, law schools start to look somewhat interchangeable with these things. Ottawa's average GPA is about a 3.5 which is nothing to sneeze at, but is lower than the 3.7's of school's like Western, Queen's, UBC, Osgoode, Dal. etc. Ottawa also doesn't release its average LSAT, which makes it hard to evaluate against other schools, although some have suggested that it comes in around the high 150's, which again would be lower than many of the schools I just listed but higher than Windsor, Lakehead, TRU, Saskatchewan etc. But then there's it's location ... sitting pretty in the nation's capital, which also happens to be the second largest city in Ontario, and outside of Toronto is arguably the most happening city in the province. Ottawa gives you unprecedented access to all things government, and in addition to being a huge draw for student, this makes it easier to differentiate the school from the more corporate focused Western's and UofT's of the world. Basically, their less than "prestigious" admissions standards can actually be credibly explained by their having a different focus than other schools due to their location. There's an argument to be made that if Ottawa upped it's admission average to say 3.7/163, it's reputation would quickly surpass that of Queen's and Western. Not that it'd be a better school necessarily, but it's two "rep" factors would exceed theirs. But it hasn't. So here we are. I'm sure there are other things people could point to explaining Ottawa's rep, but to me these two things are the most determinative.
  46. 6 points
    Thankfully I was addicted to the internet, and my life was devoid of any real interaction in the corporeal world, so a change in physical address was really quite meaningless ;).
  47. 6 points
    God fucking help me if I ever have to live with 5-6 people.
  48. 6 points
    As a general piece of advice to lurkers and 1Ls: never start a job application process by making excuses. It’s a bad look. It is not how you sell something. Doesn’t matter how relevant the excuse is.
  49. 6 points
  50. 6 points
    India is slowly getting better now. There's more respect for the lawyers and the judiciary there because, well, India is slowly building a legal system that is tolerably functional (although it's interesting to think about what the causal pathway for this development is; I'm no political scientist, but I'm pretty sure there's a division between social scientists who think economic development -> functional legal system and those who think the converse). I don't think Pakistanis are wrong to disparage law as a vocation. Their experience has been one in which the judiciary is either nakedly political or a toothless tiger. Disillusionment with lawyers and judges is natural and probably justifiable. If anything, I think the West is exceptional in its normative views about law. Most of the rest of the world makes no conceptual distinction between rule of law and rule by law (assuming there is a functional system of law in the first place, which isn't true in, e.g., the tribal areas of Pakistan).
This leaderboard is set to Toronto/GMT-04:00


  • Newsletter

    Want to keep up to date with all our latest news and information?
    Sign Up
×
×
  • Create New...