Ethical obligation of a criminal defense lawyer in sexual assault cases

Abstract

Lawyers inhabit a special place in civil society. Lawyers are ‘officers of the court’, facilitators of justice, owing their allegiance to the sacred institution of the courts that act as the altars of justice. No other profession is embroiled with as many ethical and philosophical questions and dilemmas as law because of its association to the ideal of justice. There is a consensus in the society that lawyers should be guided by a sense of duty to society. But what is this duty? Who is it owed to? Where does it come from?

This paper is divided into three parts. In part I, I elaborate on the philosophical arguments and dilemmas around lawyering and the notion of an ‘ideal lawyer’. In part II, I analyze why there is a deep ethical dilemma in criminal defense lawyering, what are the competing notions of morality and what the possible harm is. In part III, I critically analyze the arguments around the ethical obligation of a criminal defense lawyers in sexual assault cases. In the end I advance the argument that lawyers should adopt a ‘minimum damaging standard’ of lawyering i.e. advocate for their clients while causing minimum harm to the victims.