Lably
Skip to content

Legal aid

Provision of free or low-cost legal representation to disadvantaged people

  • 31 min read
  • 4 chapters

Related on Lably

Through Welfare spending, Judiciary and Europe

Legal aid is essential to guaranteeing equal access to justice for all, as provided for by Article 6.3 of the European Convention on Human Rights regarding criminal law cases and Article 6.1 of the same Convention both for civil and criminal cases. Especially for citizens who do not have sufficient financial means, the provision of legal aid to clients by governments increases the likelihood, within court proceedings, of being assisted by legal professionals for free or at a lower cost, or of receiving financial aid.

A number of delivery models for legal aid have emerged, including duty lawyers, community legal clinics, and the payment of lawyers to deal with cases for individuals who are entitled to legal aid. More informal or general legal advice and assistance may also be provided for free or at low cost through such means as law centres (UK), community legal centres (Australia) or a variety of other organisations which provide various forms of legal aid in and outside of court.

History

Legal aid has a close relationship with the welfare state, and the provision of legal aid by a state is influenced by attitudes toward welfare. Legal aid is a welfare provision by the state for people who would otherwise be unable to afford legal counsel. It also helps to ensure that welfare provisions are enforced by providing people entitled to such benefits, including social housing, with access to legal advice and the courts.

Historically, legal aid has played a significant role in ensuring respect for economic, social and cultural rights, particularly in relation to social security, housing, social care, health, and education services, which may be provided publicly or privately, as well as employment law and anti-discrimination legislation. Jurists such as Mauro Cappelletti have argued that legal aid is essential to access to justice, as it enables individuals to enforce economic, social and cultural rights through legal mechanisms. His views developed during the second half of the 20th century, when democracies with capitalist economies established liberal welfare states that focused on the individual. States increasingly acted as contractors and service providers within a market-based philosophy that emphasised the citizen as a consumer. This shift led to a greater emphasis on individual enforcement as a means of achieving the realisation of rights for all.

Prior to the mid-20th century, literature on legal aid emphasised the collective enforcement of economic, social and cultural rights. As classic welfare states were established during the 1940s and following World War II, a central principle was that citizens shared collective responsibility for economic, social, and cultural rights, and that the state assumed responsibility for those unable to provide for themselves due to illness or unemployment. The enforcement of these rights was primarily collective, achieved through public policies rather than individual legal action. Laws were enacted to support welfare provisions, but these were generally regarded as instruments for planners rather than lawyers. Legal aid schemes were introduced on the assumption that the state had a responsibility to assist those involved in legal disputes; however, these schemes initially focused mainly on family law and divorce.

During the 1950s and 1960s, the role of the welfare state evolved, and social goals were no longer assumed to be universally shared. Individuals were increasingly free to pursue their own objectives. During this period, the welfare state expanded, along with legal aid provisions, as concerns arose regarding the power of welfare providers and professionals. In the 1960s and 1970s, demand grew for individuals to have the right to legally enforce economic, social and cultural rights and the welfare benefits to which they were entitled. Mechanisms emerged that enabled citizens to enforce their economic, social, and cultural rights through legal processes, and welfare lawyers used legal aid to advise individuals on low incomes when dealing with state officials. As a result, legal aid was extended beyond family law to cover a broad range of economic, social, and cultural rights.

In the 1980s, the role of the traditional welfare state was increasingly questioned, and welfare services were more frequently provided by private entities. Legal aid was also increasingly delivered through private providers, though it remained focused primarily on assistance in court proceedings. Citizens came to be viewed more as consumers, expected to choose among available services. Where such choice was not possible, citizens were given the right to express dissatisfaction through administrative complaints processes. This development created tension, as legal aid systems were not designed to provide advice for those seeking redress through administrative complaint mechanisms. Further tensions emerged as states that prioritised individual enforcement of economic, social, and cultural rights, rather than collective enforcement through public policy, reduced funding for legal aid as a welfare provision. Individual enforcement of welfare entitlements requires levels of legal aid funding more commonly associated with systems that emphasise collective enforcement.]], and the provision of legal aid by a state is influenced by attitudes towards welfare. Legal aid is a welfare provision by the state to people who could otherwise not afford counsel from the legal system. Legal aid also helps to ensure that welfare provisions are enforced by providing people entitled to welfare provisions, such as social housing, with access to legal advice and the courts.


Prior to the mid-20th century, literature on legal aid emphasised collective enforcement of economic, social and cultural rights. As classic welfare states were built in the 1940s and following World War II, an underlying principle was that citizens had collective responsibility for economic, social and cultural rights; and the state assumed responsibility for those unable to provide for themselves through illness and unemployment. The enforcement of economic, social and cultural rights was to be collective, through policies rather than individual legal action. Laws were enacted to support welfare provisions, though these were regarded as laws for planners, not lawyers. Legal aid schemes were established, as it was assumed that the state had a responsibility to assist those engaged in legal disputes, but they initially focused primarily on family law and divorce.

In the 1950s and 1960s, the role of the welfare state changed, and social goals were no longer assumed to be common goals. Individuals were free to pursue their own goals. The welfare state in this time expanded, along with legal aid provisions, as concerns emerged over the power of welfare providers and professionals. In the 1960s and 1970s, demand rose for the right of individuals to legally enforce economic, social and cultural rights and the welfare provisions they as individuals were entitled to. Mechanisms emerged through which citizens could legally enforce their economic, social, and cultural rights, and welfare lawyers used legal aid to advise those on low income when dealing with state officials. Legal aid was extended from family law to a wide range of economic, social, and cultural rights.

In the 1980s, the role of the classic welfare state was no longer regarded as necessarily positive, and welfare was increasingly provided by private entities. Legal aid was increasingly provided through private providers, but they remained focused on providing assistance in court cases. Citizens were increasingly regarded as consumers, who should be able to choose among services. Where it was not possible to provide such a choice, citizens were given the right to voice their dissatisfaction through administrative complaints processes. This resulted in tension, as legal aid was not designed to offer advice to those seeking redress through administrative complaints processes. Tensions also began to emerge as states which emphasised individual enforcement of economic, social, and cultural rights, rather than collective enforcement through policies, reduced funding for legal aid as a welfare state provision. Individual enforcement of welfare entitlement requires the kind of legal aid funding states emphasising collective enforcement were more likely to provide.

Sign in to keep reading

3 more chapters are free with a Lably account.

More in Politics and economics