Beyond Mandatory Pro Bono: Compulsory Law Mechanisms in Access to Justice
Access to justice in any jurisdiction requires different contributions from many legal actors. Some jurisdictions have implemented compulsory requirements for lawyers, and Asia provides prime examples: Japan and South Korea have functioning systems of mandatory public interest activities, and lawyers in China are required to participate in paid legal aid services. (Whalen-Bridge 2022). Even in the U.S., where nation-wide mandatory pro bono was rejected, some courts impose systems of mandatory legal services (regarding New Jersey Courts, see https://www.probonopartner.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/Madden-Exemption-Explained-2018.pdf), and there is the phenomenon of voluntary mandatory pro bono, voluntary bar associations that impose mandatory requirements on members to provide legal services to poor and underrepresented parties. This paper argues that analysis of the wide array of compulsory lawyer mechanisms in access to justice beyond mandatory pro bono is required, and suggests a framework for identification and comparison.