(Minghui.org) Using lawyers to defend illegally prosecuted practitioners is something that has received Master’s acknowledgment and approval. No wonder it has become a common practice in China and it has indeed played a significant role in practitioners’ efforts to clarify the facts, suffocate the evil and save sentient beings.
As a practitioner who once used and appeared in court with a lawyer, I’d like to bring everyone’s attention to two issues that I think are worth discussing. The first one is that it may not be appropriate to still call every defense attorney a “Righteous Lawyer” given today’s environment in which more and more lawyers are stepping forward to defend Falun Gong practitioners. The second one is that we should be clear that the real purpose of using defense attorneys is to clarify the facts, not to win the court case.
Should We Still Call Defense Attorneys “Righteous Lawyers”?
In the early days of the persecution of Falun Gong, very few lawyers were courageous enough to stand up and defend Falun Gong practitioners. As such, back then we referred to those who did defend practitioners as “Righteous Lawyers.” Today however, as we see more and more lawyers accepting Falun Gong cases, it may not be appropriate to treat them all as righteous lawyers. After all, some lawyers get involved just for the sake of making money.
The first time I ever spoke to a lawyer was during a period when the evil was running most rampant and the entire country was blanketed with terror. Jiang's regime threatened any lawyer who dared to defend Falun Gong practitioners with job loss and compromise of personal safety. As far as I know, only about a dozen lawyers in the vast nation of China were brave enough to represent Falun Gong practitioners.
Not every lawyer had the guts to say fair words for practitioners given the suppressive environment at that time. No matter how much money was offered, most lawyers declined to accept Falun Gong cases. As such, the handful of lawyers who did defend practitioners were worth every ounce of admiration since they did so purely out of their sense of conscience and justice. They identified with the truth of Falun Gong and felt responsible for seeking justice for practitioners.
Actually not only were brave lawyers hard to find, but practitioners who dared to hire lawyers were also few and far between. It took great courage to step forward and use attorneys. I had extremely strong physical reactions while getting in touch with our lawyer. I was overwhelmed by “fear;” so was our lawyer. My heart was pounding, my legs were shaking and I was sweating profusely. Both the lawyer and I felt like we were rubbing shoulders with death.
Of course, such strong physical reactions didn’t shake our will to accomplish what we wanted, but rather it reminded us to get better in using reason and wisdom in dealing with the court system. Instead of being crushed by fear, we overcame it and went through the test of life and death together with the lawyer. And to be sure it was not for the sake of material interest or fame.
We called such lawyers “Righteous Lawyers” because the title perfectly fit the situation at that time. None of those lawyers were practitioner and what pulled them through was their sense of righteousness. When we clarified the facts to them, the key message we tried to get across was that it was important for them to uphold justice and safeguard conscience.
When we submitted reports to the Minghui website, we also used the title of “Righteous Lawyers” when referring to them. This practice has been continued by many practitioners in China to this day.
However, things have changed greatly in recent years. Though the persecution is still going on, the suppression of lawyers is no longer as severe. The shadowing, monitoring and retaliation against lawyers is very rare these days. Many more lawyers are now willing to take Falun Gong cases, but we see some getting involved only because they want to make money. Some attorneys even negotiate terms and strike deals in their own favor privately with the judge. Appearing in court becomes just a formality and acting in the best interest of their practitioner clients is not always their main concern.
If we still call such lawyers “Righteous Lawyers,” it no longer sounds appropriate.
Actually attorney is just a profession and there is no need to add “Righteous” in front of the title. Of course, I am not saying there is anything wrong with the use of “Righteous Lawyers” in special circumstances. We may still use this title when necessary but we should have a clear understanding of whether we should still refer to every defense attorney as a “Righteous Lawyer.”
What is the Real Purpose of Using Defense Attorneys?
Why do we have to use lawyers to defend our fellow practitioners? From everyday people’s perspective, it is because most of us are not legal experts and we need assistance from attorneys, just like non-practitioners who seek legal counsel when dealing with legal matters.
However, as Dafa disciples, there is the matter of cultivation involved in our use of lawyers. Our purpose of using lawyers is totally different from that of non-practitioners. Based on my understanding of Master’s teachings, we only clarify the facts to save people. In other words, our use of lawyers is just conforming to everyday people’s society, not for the sake of winning any court case. After all, those cases are already won in other dimensions.
When we use lawyers, we get to clarify the facts to everyone we encounter during the process, including family members and friends of detained practitioners, lawyers and judges. We focus on the process itself, not the outcome of the lawsuit.
Since we are still cultivating, we are bound to still harbor human notions. When we rely on the lawyers to rescue our fellow practitioners, when we are eager to win the case, when we ride an emotion roller coaster (i.e., feeling happy/disappointed when a lawyer agrees/declines to take our case), and when we become hostile when encountering hostile people, we are exhibiting all kinds of human attachments.
My own experience tells me that we won’t be able to clarify the facts well when we have all those attachments. Sometimes we feel that the lawyer is not of high caliber when in fact it is we who are not doing a good job.
I suggest that we keep in mind Master’s teaching,
“Validate the Fa with rationality, clarify the truth with wisdom, spread the Fa and save people with mercy—this is establishing the mighty virtue of an Enlightened Being.” (“Rationality,” Essentials for Further Advancement II)
When I was getting in touch with lawyers, this passage of the Fa was uppermost in my thoughts.
Please point out anything inappropriate.
