In actual operation, although most legal service offices are established in accordance with the establishment requirements of public institutions, for example, the person in charge is appointed by the government, and there is no legal person registration in any form, but there is no establishment of legal services. The vast majority. And the practice certificate obtained clearly indicates that the organization is a legal person. In 2004, public institution administration bureaus were established in various places. Because the legal service office does not have a staff, the words "Public Institution Legal Person" in the practice certificate have been cancelled.
In 2000, in order to solve the problem of the social status of legal service offices in the future, the Ministry of Justice required local legal service offices to restructure. Some places have promulgated local regulations for the establishment of legal service offices, classifying legal service offices as administrative institutions or intermediary agencies, and allowing them to register legal persons in their respective fields. However, to date, most regional legal services offices have not been restructured.
The current legal status of legal service offices is: public institutions, with no public institution benefits, and no one even pays for co-ordination. This is a national problem.
Legal service firms, as the big brothers in the legal profession, are already facing a point of no return. Because when the team of lawyers does not have a large scale, the tasks of legal services in our country are basically undertaken by legal services. After the promulgation of the Lawyers Law, in order to train lawyers, the state stipulated in the form of law that criminal cases that are easiest to handle must be left to law firms for independent management. It’s a pity that law firms do not assume such responsibility. They gather in big cities, far away from impoverished mountainous areas and towns, and claim to be the bosses in the field of legal services. They often curse when they fail to gain the trust of their clients because legal services strengthen their jobs. It is very wrong to even ridicule lawyers in legal service firms as second lawyers. I can responsibly say that many lawyers are brought to the legal service journey by legal service workers. Legal workers in legal service offices are not only second lawyers, but also teachers and elder brothers of lawyers. Not only are their average age older than that of lawyers, but their legal service qualifications were last verified in 2000, which is 10 years ago. Their practice can be said to belong to senior people.
Nearly all the problems that exist in legal services exist in law firms and not in legal services. There are also law firms. For example, extortion and defrauding defendants' families are almost always done by lawyers from law firms.
At present, there are more than 200,000 legal service teams in our country, but it is not that many. Secondly, there are too few of them. China needs a legal service team of 100,000 people to lubricate future social conflicts. Only in this way can China's administrative team be well-established and cause less harm to social management.
I once suggested that the current five and a half levels of government should be changed to a three-level government and the current number of civil servants should be reduced by three-quarters. Among them, redundant personnel can only be gathered in the legal service team, and at the same time undertake social legal service work that should not be borne by taxpayers in the first place. For example, the anti-counterfeiting information in the industrial and commercial field, the pricing function of the price department, the qualification review function of most departments, and the certification function are almost all functions of legal services.
Currently, the reorganization of legal services is a social issue. Because the Minister of Justice has never been on the Standing Committee, and even very few have been on the Politburo, his departmental regulations have been severely discriminated against. However, the future trend is that the Minister of Justice will join the Standing Committee. A model dominated by the Public Security Bureau and the Procuratorate may be formed because the Public Security Bureau and the Procuratorate cannot and should not become local hegemons and must be restrained by the Ministry of Justice.
Grassroots legal service offices are legal service organizations established in towns and city streets in accordance with the "Measures for the Administration of Grassroots Legal Service Offices" and are the practice institutions for grassroots legal workers.
Grassroots legal service offices are managed and operated in accordance with the corporate legal person system, bear civil responsibilities independently, and practice independently in accordance with the law. Their professional activities are not interfered with, and their property rights are not infringed. Grassroots legal service offices are market intermediary organizations that provide legal services to the society. Entrusted by county-level judicial administration agencies or township and street judicial offices, assist in carrying out grassroots judicial administration work.
In terms of nature, it is not a public institution, it only operates with reference to public institutions, and it is self-operated and profitable, not a public institution. It is essentially equivalent to a law firm, except that the staff there are not qualified as lawyers and it is an intermediary agency.
If it is still in the nature of financial appropriation, it is a public welfare institution. If it is completely financially responsible for its own profits and losses, it will be the same as a law firm.
It is not a public welfare unit, but the property of the original premises and law firms where government legal staff left the government to provide legal services after the reform.
Number