12. With regard to article No. (39) of the draft law, which stipulates that:” The lawyer whether a litigant
or an attorney in a lawsuit shall be entitled to authorize another lawyer in the attendance, pleadings,
or other litigation procedures under his responsibility without private power of attorney (POA) as
long as there is nothing hindering this in the POA”. The NIHR finds that the above article allows the
lawyer to authorize another lawyer on his behalf in the attendance, pleadings or the other litigation
procedures, whether the former is original litigant or attorney in the judicial lawsuit. However, this
authorization in its current form, and as applicable in practice, may be subject to abuse if the other
authorized lawyer deals with bad faith or if he uses such authorization without the knowledge and
approval of the lawyer himself. Consequently, the rights and interests of the parties to the lawsuit
will be compromised.
13. The NIHR finds that it is preferable that the authorization mentioned in the above article shall
be in writing, whatsoever the cogency thereof to be submitted to the competent court to protect
and maintain the interest of the all parties to the judicial lawsuit in agreement with the just trial
guarantee and as established by the related international convention for human rights.
14. R
egarding Article No. (42), which stipulates that: “The lawyer shall offer judicial assistance for
citizens and others who are financially unable to pay legal fees when delegated by the court, and
he shall perform his duty in the same diligence to be exerted if he is authorized. In this case, he may
not abstain from the defense unless he has been granted permission from the court before which he
undertakes the defense. He shall continue until his withdrawal request is approved and a substitute
lawyer is appointed.” The NIHR finds that while article no. (20) of the Constitution of Kingdom of
Bahrain amended by article no. (f) expressly stipulates “the right to litigation shall be guaranteed
in accordance with the law”. In addition, such right, which is established legislatively, may not
involve discrimination between citizens and others, because it is a right that shall be enjoyed by
each individual existing within the judicial jurisdiction of the State. Therefore, it was unjustified to
use the term in the phrase (citizens and others who are financially unable) to refer to parties to the
lawsuit as mentioned in the above article. In addition, the phrase (and others) is an unknown term
and has an unspecified meaning.
اﻟﺘﻘﺮﻳﺮ اﻟﺴﻨﻮي اﻟﺜﺎﻟﺚ
ﻟﻠﻤﺆﺳﺴﺔ اﻟﻮﻃﻨﻴﺔ ﻟﺤﻘﻮق اﻧﺴﻨﺎم
ـ ﻣﻤﻠﻜﺔ اﻟﺒﺤﺮﻳﻦ2015 ﻟﻌﺎم
15. The NIHR finds that, in line with the sound legal formation, it is preferred to replace the phrase
(citizens and others who are financially unable) by (the litigants) and reformulate the whole article
taking into account the aforementioned considerations.
16. With regard to the final Article No. (65), which stipulates that: “Each lawyer who violates the
provisions of this law or of his profession’s duties or performs work that affects or degrades
the ethics and traditions of the profession shall be punished by any of the following penalties:
1. Warning. 2. Reprimand. 3. Suspension from practicing the profession for a period not more than
two years. 4. Disbarment. While it is established by virtue of legislation, justice, and administrative
law jurisprudence; especially in the field of the disciplinary accountability, it is necessary that the
determined disciplinary penalties shall be graded in terms of severity considering its principle
agrees with the human rights. This approach is stipulated in the provisions of the Civil Service
Bureau issued by decree-by-law No. (48) of 2010; especially, article No. (23), which begins with
the verbal warning followed by the written warning and then suspension from work with salary
deduction for a period not exceeding one month during a year and not more than ten days each
time, reaching to the dismissal from the service.
34