Lawyering between the prestige of justice and the glamor of fame

Listen to the article. The audio text is automated, generated by an automated system

Law is not just a profession whose owner pleads before the courts, but rather a trust based on protecting rights, preserving secrets, establishing arguments, and participating in achieving justice. When a lawyer takes on a case, he does not just receive a file of papers; Rather, people are entrusted with their interests, their reputations, and perhaps the most private details of their lives. Hence, the law gained its prestige, not from titles or appearance, but from the trust that society places in those who carry its message. Therefore, the most dangerous thing that may happen to this profession is that the responsibility of defending rights is mixed with the glamor of fame, and that people’s issues become a means of creating media presence.

The Kingdom has witnessed a noticeable expansion in the presence of lawyers through the media and digital platforms, which is a praiseworthy development when its goal is to spread legal culture and inform society of its rights. However, some practices revealed a confusion that deserves to be addressed. Between legal awareness and reviewing disputes, between expressing professional opinions and creating excitement, and between introducing legal services and revealing details of cases. The lawyer is an agent in the dispute, and is not the owner of its secrets, and what he learns by virtue of his profession does not turn into material that is permissible for publication simply because he has the ability to reach the public.

Hence the importance of what the Ministry of Justice is doing in strengthening the follow-up of professional practice, monitoring violations, and activating existing controls. Perhaps the Ministry's credit in this approach is that it realizes that developing the justice system is not limited to modernizing procedures and accelerating services, but rather extends to improving the behavior of practitioners themselves. Regulation is not complete by setting rules, but rather by monitoring their impact, addressing deficiencies, and establishing a professional culture that recognizes that the legal profession is a responsibility before it is a privilege. The prestige of the profession is not maintained by the license alone, but rather by the behavior that deserves that license.

The issue has a clear regulatory basis; Article Nine of the Publications and Publications Law prohibits publishing the facts of investigations or trials without obtaining permission from the legally authorized party. The rules of professional conduct for lawyers also establish obligations related to protecting clients’ secrets and privacy, taking into account the requirements of investigation and trial, and avoiding misleading and breaching the honor of the profession. These provisions are not formal restrictions on the freedom of the lawyer, but rather guarantees for the protection of litigants, the integrity of procedures, and confidence in the judicial facility.

There is a legal issue worth emphasizing: the client’s agreement to talk about his case does not necessarily mean that all its details may be published; The information may relate to the rights of opponents or witnesses, or to investigation and trial procedures that are subject to independent controls. Also, the pending case should not turn into a parallel trial on platforms, in which evidence is reduced, judgments are preempted, and influencing public opinion becomes an alternative to argument before the judiciary.

This does not mean calling for the exclusion of lawyers from the media; Society needs qualified legal voices to explain regulations and enrich public debate. But what is required is clarity of professional boundaries, enhancing awareness of them, and activating accountability when they are crossed, while distinguishing between a professional violation and a legitimate legal opinion. The lawyer's media appearance is an extension of his professional responsibility, not an exception to it.

The deeper impact of this trend does not stop at deterring abuses, but rather extends to enhancing society’s confidence in the legal profession, protecting the privacy of litigants, and establishing due respect for the judiciary. This is the institutional value of the Ministry of Justice’s efforts. The quality of professional behavior must remain parallel to the quality of judicial services, and every practitioner must realize that what he says outside the courtroom may be an extension of what he has been entrusted with inside it.

The law firm is not hostile to fame, but it does not accept that fame comes at the expense of honesty. A lawyer does not need his clients' cases to make his name; His knowledge, honesty and performance are what make him. When the secrets of litigants are protected, not only the dignity of the legal profession is protected, but also the prestige of justice itself is protected.