SHOULD ADVOCACY BE A PUBLIC SERVICE ?

SHOULD ADVOCACY BE A PUBLIC SERVICE ?
The government is already offering lot of public services. We all know what kind of quality public services government offers. Making advocacy under control of bureaucrats will give them more power and more money. It means more costs, more inefficiency and more corruption.

In the cases which are filed by the Government it should be the responsibility of the Government to provide legal aid / service to all against whom it has filed the cases.
Then the criminals/ fraudsters/ corrupt will benefit the most. All these cases are filed by State. These people will do crimes and government(read tax payers) will pay money to fight their cases. This is no justice but will become legalized extortion of tax payers money.

In the cases wherein the Government is not a party the responsibility to provide defence Lawyer / Advocate to the opposition should be lied upon the claimant and finally upon the looser.
If the claimant is an honest person who is making a true claim, why should he pay the dishonest person? Such a move will discourage the suffering people to approach courts because they will have to spend twice the money for just fighting for the case. And the dishonest persons will fight all the way to Supreme Court using the money of the claimants. Thus this will be outright injustice on the claimant.

BUT, the Advocate / Legal aid should be provided by the Government.
Free legal aid is already provided to indigent persons by Government. It means the tax payers are already paying money for indigent persons. Why should tax payers be burdened more to treat everyone as indigent persons?

If such a thing is done, then either the government will have to tax people more and more OR print more and more paper currency to fund these procedures. It will cause more inflation. Who suffers the most due to inflation? The poor and middle class suffer the most because the value of money in their pockets and bank accounts decreases. Thus they are forced into more hardships and more hard work to live.
 
The Advocates / Lawyer should be under PUBLIC SERVICE registered with the Government on the basis of some PAYMENT OF WAGES REGULATION alike.
What is the aim of such a move? Already  the condition of public services is well known. More regulations means more power to the bureaucrats. More power means more corruptions.

The citizens should apply to Government to provide an Advocate / Legal Aid and accordingly should deposit the wages to the Government and the Advocate / Lawyer should be paid by the Government. 
Means more material/ more resources/ more bureaucrats needs to be allocated to manage such vast amounts of money. To maintain these resources will cost regular money. Again more burdern on tax payers or government will have to print more currency notes.

NO DIRECT TRANSACTION SHOULD BE BETWEEN ADVOCATE / LAWYER AS THE PUBLIC SERVANT.  NO PRIVATE ADVOCATE SHOULD BE ALLOWED OFFICIALLY TO BE APPEAR BEFORE COURT.
The Constitution guarantees equality before law and also guarantees personal liberty. It will be violation of both.

ONLY, In the Business Matters the Private Advocate should be allowed, however, there should be some regulation for transactions through public service.
More regulations means more power in hands of bureacrats. Thus more scope for corruption.

PAYER SHOULD BE THE MASTER AND SERVER SHOULD BE RESPONSIBLE LEGALLY.
Payer is already now the master. He can choose an advocate of his own choice, as per his own pocket. There are advocates suiting people of all pocket sizes. It needs to be remembered, costly advocate does not always mean better advocate or better results in court.

The present situation is like medical services. Medical services are provided by both government hospitals and private hospitals. People have free choice to go to government hospitals or private hospitals because the payers are the master. Where is the problem?