City Press and Media 24 have brought a court case for access to the disciplinary hearing of the Johannesburg Bar of Menzi Simelane.  This will be of huge interest to attorneys, because our present principles prevent the media from taking part in disciplinary hearings.  Mike Hellens is quoted as saying that the procedure for holding disciplinary enquiries behind closed doors “has simply been wrong”.  He went on to say that the public needs to see the manner in which the Bar enquiries into its members so that the public can trust advocates and the institution of the Bar.

In opposing this, it has been argued apparently that because the Bar is a voluntary association of advocates it is different from other forums.  It would be very interesting to see what ruling comes out but I would imagine that however long it takes, ultimately all disciplinary proceedings will be opened to the media and to members of the public and there will certainly be some good aspects to it, as well as bad ones – particularly with some of the sensationalist reporting we get.  From my own experience, having Chaired many of these enquiries over the years before I was a Law Society Councillor, I can tell you that many complaints, without any substance at all, make it to these committees and the media perception that it is just professionals looking after other professionals is totally incorrect. You are simply faced with a complaint against another attorney, which has absolutely no merit and you sometimes even sympathise with him or her, in terms of the client that they have had to deal with.  Some attorneys, in the eagerness to get business, take on extremely difficult people, who are not necessarily right in any event, and then get surprised when that person turns on them later.  One must choose your attorney carefully, but likewise attorneys have to have some regard for the clients they agree to take on.