The question of how we strive toward that goal is a matter of practical strategies. It has been our experience B during many years of work in this area B that a voluntary approach to pro bono service and reporting is far more likely to yield positive results. Mandatory Service A model rule calling for mandatory service would be both ineffective in broadening access to justice and impractical to implement. Mandatory pro bono service is likely to provide, at best, only the illusion of improvements in access to justice. We note that a central concern in the national debate about the death penalty is the ineffective counsel provided by appointed lawyers at the trial level.
Recent studies indicate that lawyers appointed to take such cases often perform inadequately.
From this analogous situation, the evidence is clear that conscripts make poor lawyers. Similarly, poor clients in civil matters deserve lawyers who want to represent them and who will do it with vigor. We fervently hope that each lawyer will embrace a set of fundamental values B will have an internal moral compass B that calls him or her to give something back to society, to provide legal services to those who cannot afford to pay. At the same time, we remain convinced that the desire to do so, and to do so with an acceptable level of competence and enthusiasm, must come from within. An unintended byproduct of a mandatory pro bono service rule is that it is very likely to be implemented in such a way that it actually weakens the current rule, which makes clear that the primary focus of pro bono service is provision of legal assistance to persons of limited means.