Unethical practices in the legal system

In India, nearly 10 years after the Bhopal gas disaster, special courts set up to distribute compensation money were dogged by abuses. Corruption, and the problem of tracking down the illiterate victims, resulted in a breakdown of the system set up to help them.

In Peru in 1992 the reforming president claimed that the courts were so corrupt that a judge could be bought for US$5-10,000. In the experience of many Brazilians, corruption in the country's legal system it itself a major obstacle to the application of the law. Some judges are perceived to be as receptive to bids as auctioneers. It was only in 1985 that judges were first penalized for irregularities. Drug traffickers have traditionally protected their operations by corrupting law enforcement agents, judges and other government officials, or using intimidation. The situation in Colombia is considered to be the most dramatic manifestation of this in the world. In drug cases judges there are offered a choice between a bullet or a bribe. Some 200 judges and judicial personnel have been assassinated there in the last few decades.

In Scotland in 1993 a major scandal provoked a judicial inquiry into the involvement of some high ranking members in the Scottish legal profession of homosexual orientation might have obstructed the course of justice.

In 1993 in Italy nine Sicilian judges were under investigation for alleged collusion with the Mafia. A report prepared for the Italian parliament indicated that the Sicilian Mafia had been able to influence the entire judicial system, up to the highest court of appeal. This followed an arrest of a Milan judge earlier in the year for accepting bribes (of up to US$250,000) and the investigation of seven Neapolitan judges for leniency in the handling of cases involving the local Mafia. Trials were allegedly "adjusted" in favour of the Camorra and information was supplied as to which judges to bribe.

In the UK in 1993, there was a call for a ban on barristers and solicitors having sex with their clients, emphasizing that divorce lawyers were most exposed to the risks and temptations of entanglement. In such cases, where the clients were most vulnerable and great faith was placed in the chosen advocate, there were clear opportunities for the lawyer to abuse dependent trust.