LAWYERS IN THE NEW DSMN SYSTEM

What will the lawyers do in the DSMN system? Actually, all the same, they will search for evidence that the suspect did not commit what he is accused of. But they will do it without jural red tape. For example, the lawyer's request remains in force, which no one can ignore and which any organization must answer, the constant communication between the lawyer and his client, and the things like that.

The lawyer will be chosen by the suspect himself. The suspect will be provided with a lawyers list from which they will choose, in their opinion, the best and most accessible lawyer at the moment.

Lawyers are provided free of charge, supported by the budget and are required to respond immediately to a call to defend a suspect.

However, there is an exception here, if a lawyer already has at least one active case in which he is engaged, then he can refuse another parallel one. In total, a lawyer is allowed to handle no more than two cases at a time. This is done to not pursue quantity and by doing so sacrifice quality. So that there is no attitude on the part of lawyers like: "Anyway, I'll take 30 cases at once and will solve at least a couple of them and even doing all the cases half way, I'll definitely earn the money."

Lawyer salary

A lawyer receives an increase to the standard salary of his work in exactly the same amount if he has successfully proved the innocence of the suspect. For example, a lawyer receives 5,000 dollars per month of his standard salary, which he basically has in the service of the state. If he proves the suspect's innocence, he is paid another 5,000 dollars immediately after the charges against the suspect are dropped.

But in order to get an increase in his salary, it is up to the lawyer to find evidence justifying the suspect, and not so that the detective or operatives found out that the suspect was not involved in crime and released the suspect themselves, but the lawyer will receive his double salary. No, it won't work that way.

Thus, it is beneficial for all lawyers to engage in real investigations and receive extra money and higher rating for this, but at the same time, due to the limitation on the number of simultaneous cases (no more than two), a lawyer cannot deal with cases in a slipshod manner if he really wants to earn money.

By the way, the detective and his assistants can also receive an increase in their salary, just like the lawyer and in exactly the same amount, if they make the suspect talk with their persuasions. Of course any violence is excluded.

The procedure of lawyer-client communication in custody

A suspect can only be held in an holding cell of his own autonomy, there must also be an interrogation room where the detective (or operatives), as well as the lawyer and the suspect must be allowed at any time. Both in the holding cell and in the interrogation room, video surveillance is constantly conducted with recordings that are always available to second-order executives (Prosecutors) and third-order executives (Judges) of the autonomy. During the stay of the lawyer and the suspect in the interrogation room, the audio recording is turned off, which is confirmed by a special lamp placed above the door.

Special training for lawyers

Lawyers will be specially trained. They wil be trained for a relatively short time, since world of law in the form in which it has now will cease to exist, which means that a person with a lawyer's position will not be engaged in jural and bureaucratic nonsense, but in searching for real evidence of the innocence of suspects.

There will be no more nonsense when, due to an almost incorrectly placed comma, they could, due to the competent actions of a "lawyer", release a real fraudster who cheated millions and tens of millions people. Or vice versa, detain for a much longer or even indefinite period a some person who turned out to be innocent, but cannot file a complaint. Because he doesn't understand anything in this crazy jural subtle aspects, which means he agrees with his detention and allegedly doesn't protest.

Training of a limited number of lawyers

Since if there are too many lawyers, it is bad for the budget, and if there are not enough, then there is a heavy burden on the lawyers themselves, and it is not yet clear exactly how many they need for a comfortable life for lawyers and at the same time the rapid and effective realization of justice and fairness.

Thus, to begin with, we will adopt the standard that is currently present in some countries. According this standard an average city with a population of about 350,000 people will need about 210 lawyers.

I would like to emphasize that these are the most initial and approximate figures in order to build on something, i.e. in fact, there may be more in the future. Therefore, based on the above, the quotas for lawyers will be limited. In other words, it will be impossible to study for it and get a lawyer's certificate all the time.

Anti-corruption protection

If it turns out (with evidence) that there is collusion between the detective and the lawyer, then the cases they conducted will be reviewed. As a result, both of them will end up behind bars, and their close relatives will be banned from holding any executive positions and posts forever.

If there is no real evidence regarding the collusion, but there are doubts, then the lawyer and the detective can have their licenses (documents) taken away and deprived of the opportunity to engage in their activity with the wording "due to loss of trust."

Their licenses can be taken away by third-order executives (Judges) of the autonomies in which they (lawyer and detective) are registered.

In the same way, we can revoke the license of one lawyer if it turns out that he is simply unscrupulous or slack working. The suspect (or his relatives) can complain to a second-order executive (Prosecutor) or a third-order executive (Judge) of his autonomy about his lawyer and explain the situation.

After that, a second-order executive (Prosecutor) or a third-order executive (Judge) contacts colleagues from the autonomy where the lawyer lives and comes to a conclusion about what to do with the lawyer against whom the complaint was received.

If suddenly a third-order executive (Judge) of the autonomy in which the lawyer resides refuses to revoke his license without any arguments and, so to speak, cover him up and he has the right to do so. Then the third-order executive (Judge) of the autonomy where the injured party resides also has the right to vote regarding the fate of the license of such a lawyer with the participation of three third-order executives (Judge) of the neighboring autonomies, but he must explain the whole situation to them as well.

The suspect, of course, chooses another lawyer for himself at the time of these proceedings.