“原住民的沟通困难”:超越法律从业人员入职规则范本的原住民缺陷

IF 0.7 Q3 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Legal Education Review Pub Date : 2019-01-01 DOI:10.53300/001c.7956
Marcelle J. Burns, Simon N. M. Young, Jennifer Nielsen
{"title":"“原住民的沟通困难”:超越法律从业人员入职规则范本的原住民缺陷","authors":"Marcelle J. Burns, Simon N. M. Young, Jennifer Nielsen","doi":"10.53300/001c.7956","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The Law Admissions Consultative Committee’s Model Admission Rules 2015 require new practising lawyers to have an ‘awareness’ of the difficulties of communication attributable to cultural differences, including ‘the difficulties of communication encountered by Indigenous peoples’ (LACC: 31). While there is no doubt that effective cross-communication is essential to providing ethical legal representation for clients from diverse cultural backgrounds, this paper will argue that in the context of the First Peoples of Australia greater regulatory attention to these issues is urgently needed and that the ‘difficulties of communication’ need to be framed differently. Numerous reports and inquiries have shown that First Peoples’ encounters with the Australian legal system are fraught with a lack of cultural understanding on the part of non-Indigenous legal actors. Given the ongoing and systemic over-representation of First Peoples in the criminal justice system and child protection regimes, there is a critical need for lawyers to develop Indigenous cultural competency as one step towards addressing this gross injustice, and making the Australian legal system more responsive to the needs and aspirations of First Peoples. Canadian developments, particularly in the wake of the final report of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, underline the scale and significance of this need, and provide some broader context for a reconsideration of legal education and professional admission requirements in Australia. This paper will argue that Indigenous cultural competency should be a mandatory requirement for admission to legal practice in Australia, and that the ‘deficit discourse’ on First Peoples’ engagement with the legal system must be discarded, to ensure that legal ethical and professional responsibilities are inclusive of the needs of First Peoples.","PeriodicalId":43058,"journal":{"name":"Legal Education Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2019-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"‘The Difficulties of Communication Encountered by Indigenous Peoples’: Moving Beyond Indigenous Deficit in the Model Admission Rules for Legal Practitioners\",\"authors\":\"Marcelle J. Burns, Simon N. M. Young, Jennifer Nielsen\",\"doi\":\"10.53300/001c.7956\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The Law Admissions Consultative Committee’s Model Admission Rules 2015 require new practising lawyers to have an ‘awareness’ of the difficulties of communication attributable to cultural differences, including ‘the difficulties of communication encountered by Indigenous peoples’ (LACC: 31). While there is no doubt that effective cross-communication is essential to providing ethical legal representation for clients from diverse cultural backgrounds, this paper will argue that in the context of the First Peoples of Australia greater regulatory attention to these issues is urgently needed and that the ‘difficulties of communication’ need to be framed differently. Numerous reports and inquiries have shown that First Peoples’ encounters with the Australian legal system are fraught with a lack of cultural understanding on the part of non-Indigenous legal actors. Given the ongoing and systemic over-representation of First Peoples in the criminal justice system and child protection regimes, there is a critical need for lawyers to develop Indigenous cultural competency as one step towards addressing this gross injustice, and making the Australian legal system more responsive to the needs and aspirations of First Peoples. Canadian developments, particularly in the wake of the final report of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, underline the scale and significance of this need, and provide some broader context for a reconsideration of legal education and professional admission requirements in Australia. This paper will argue that Indigenous cultural competency should be a mandatory requirement for admission to legal practice in Australia, and that the ‘deficit discourse’ on First Peoples’ engagement with the legal system must be discarded, to ensure that legal ethical and professional responsibilities are inclusive of the needs of First Peoples.\",\"PeriodicalId\":43058,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Legal Education Review\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Legal Education Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.53300/001c.7956\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Legal Education Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.53300/001c.7956","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

法律入学咨询委员会2015年的《入学示范规则》要求新执业律师“意识到”文化差异造成的沟通困难,包括“土著人民遇到的沟通困难”(LACC: 31)。毫无疑问,有效的交叉沟通对于为来自不同文化背景的客户提供合乎道德的法律代理至关重要,本文将认为,在澳大利亚第一民族的背景下,迫切需要对这些问题进行更大的监管关注,并且需要对“沟通困难”进行不同的定义。许多报告和调查表明,第一民族与澳大利亚法律制度的接触充满了非土著法律行为者缺乏文化理解的问题。鉴于第一民族在刑事司法系统和儿童保护制度中的持续和系统性代表性过高,律师迫切需要发展土著文化能力,作为解决这一严重不公正现象的一步,并使澳大利亚的法律制度更能满足第一民族的需求和愿望。加拿大的事态发展,特别是在真相与和解委员会的最后报告之后,强调了这一需要的规模和重要性,并为重新考虑澳大利亚的法律教育和专业入学要求提供了一些更广泛的背景。本文将论证土著文化能力应该是进入澳大利亚法律实践的强制性要求,并且必须抛弃关于第一民族参与法律体系的“赤字话语”,以确保法律道德和专业责任包括第一民族的需求。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
‘The Difficulties of Communication Encountered by Indigenous Peoples’: Moving Beyond Indigenous Deficit in the Model Admission Rules for Legal Practitioners
The Law Admissions Consultative Committee’s Model Admission Rules 2015 require new practising lawyers to have an ‘awareness’ of the difficulties of communication attributable to cultural differences, including ‘the difficulties of communication encountered by Indigenous peoples’ (LACC: 31). While there is no doubt that effective cross-communication is essential to providing ethical legal representation for clients from diverse cultural backgrounds, this paper will argue that in the context of the First Peoples of Australia greater regulatory attention to these issues is urgently needed and that the ‘difficulties of communication’ need to be framed differently. Numerous reports and inquiries have shown that First Peoples’ encounters with the Australian legal system are fraught with a lack of cultural understanding on the part of non-Indigenous legal actors. Given the ongoing and systemic over-representation of First Peoples in the criminal justice system and child protection regimes, there is a critical need for lawyers to develop Indigenous cultural competency as one step towards addressing this gross injustice, and making the Australian legal system more responsive to the needs and aspirations of First Peoples. Canadian developments, particularly in the wake of the final report of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, underline the scale and significance of this need, and provide some broader context for a reconsideration of legal education and professional admission requirements in Australia. This paper will argue that Indigenous cultural competency should be a mandatory requirement for admission to legal practice in Australia, and that the ‘deficit discourse’ on First Peoples’ engagement with the legal system must be discarded, to ensure that legal ethical and professional responsibilities are inclusive of the needs of First Peoples.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Legal Education Review
Legal Education Review EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
自引率
66.70%
发文量
7
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊最新文献
Psychological Distress at a Regional Australian Law School: Reporting on Law Students’ Experiences of Depression, Anxiety, and Stress Foreword: Special Issue on Equity, Equality and Legal Education Equality Law Protection for Legal Education: Internships, Volunteering and Clinics Supervising Undergraduate Law Students’ Dissertations: A Four-Step Review Legal Education for Non-Lawyers as ‘Legal First Aid’: A Participatory Inquiry into Law for Social Work Students
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1