POLA 2004 Country Report Japan Federation of Bar Associations. Practicing Attorney System in Japan

Transcription

1 POLA 2004 Country Report Japan Federation of Bar Associations Practicing Attorney System in Japan Chapter 1 Outline of the Practicing Attorney System in Japan 1. Requirements to Become Practicing Attorneys In Japan, those who pass the national bar examination and complete apprenticeship at the Legal Research and Training Institute of the Supreme Court are qualified to become a practicing attorney, a judge or a public prosecutor. There are currently approximately 20,500 practicing attorneys registered with the Japan Federation of Bar Associations (the JFBA ). Although there are other ways to become a practicing attorney under the Practicing Attorney Law, those who take such other routes constitute less 2% of the total number of the practicing attorneys. Note: More detailed explanation is stated in Attachment hereto. 2. Registration in Rolls of Lawyers Those who are qualified to be a practicing attorney may apply for registration at the JFBA. They can practice as a practicing attorney only after the registration is completed. All the practicing attorneys are also required to become members of any of the 52 local bar associations. Note: More detailed explanation is stated in Attachment hereto. 3. Assessment by JFBA for Registration in Rolls of Lawyers When an application for registration is made to the JFBA by a person who is qualified to be a practicing attorney, the Qualification Screening Board, the assessment body established pursuant to the Practicing Attorney Law managed by the President at 1

2 the JFBA, examines the application. The same type of the qualification screening board is instituted in each local bar association as well in order to examine an application for registration at the local bar association. The JFBA can reject an application for registration by such persons who would possibly undermine the order or the credibility of the bar or who suffer from mental or physical disorders, and so on. Even though a person is qualified to become a practicing attorney, that person cannot practice as a practicing attorney if his/her application for registration is rejected. 4. Rights of Supervision and Discipline by the JFBA and Local Bar Associations The JFBA and the local bar associations have rights to instruct and supervise their members (practicing attorneys), and at the same time, have the authority to reprimand their members for their misconduct. The JFBA and the local bar associations are able to implement disciplinary measures such as suspension of the qualification as a practicing attorney for 3 years, revocation of the registration and/or prohibition from practicing as an attorney for a period of up to 2 years. Other than through the above-mentioned disciplinary measures by the JFBA or any of the local bar associations, there are cases where the qualification as a practicing attorney may be forfeit due to imposition of criminal penalties, declaration of bankruptcy, and the like. Please note, however, that only the JFBA or the local bar associations have the authority to revoke registration in the Rolls of Lawyers for practicing attorney s misconduct as one of their autonomous authorities. Note: More detailed explanation is stated in Attachment hereto. 5. Independence of Authority of JFBA and Local Bar Associations The Government or any administrative institutions have neither authority over registration in the Rolls of Lawyers such as change or revocation of registration nor disciplinary right to suspend practice or revoke registration in the Rolls of Lawyers. The Government or any administrative institutions do not have any authority to order the JFBA or local bar associations to do any of the above-mentioned measures. When a practicing attorney (or a person who wishes to become a practicing 2

3 attorney) undergoes such disposition by the JFBA or a local bar association, the person can file an action with a court for annulment of the bar association s disposition. There are 5 cases in the past 10 years where the court annulled dispositions by the JFBA (registration rejection or disciplinary measures as the case may be). 3

4 Chapter 2 Activities of Practicing Attorneys in Japan 1. Civil Litigation Cases In Japan, civil litigation cases in the first instance (cases in which the value of the object of the suit is in excess of 1.4 million yen, or cases that, even though the value of the object of the suit is under 1.4 million yen, nevertheless seems appropriate to be handled in district courts rather than in summary courts) are in principle under the jurisdiction of the district courts. Ordinary civil litigation cases newly accepted in district courts are approximately 160,000 cases per year and about 90% of the parties to such cases appoint practicing attorneys as their legal counsels. In summary courts, which handle cases where the value of the object of the suit is under 1.4 million yen in principle (newly accepted cases per year is around 310,000), the ratio to retain practicing attorneys is around 10% for ordinary civil cases, and about 94% for ordinary civil cases handled by high courts in the second instance (cases newly accepted per year is about 17,000). Since April 2003, the system has been changed, pursuant to the Judicial System Reform, so that, other than practicing attorneys, a portion of judicial scriveners are able to represent the party to a case at summary courts. 2. Criminal Cases As for criminal cases, approximately 74,000 newly accepted cases are handled per year at district courts. Since most of those cases require, under the laws, defense counsels being assigned, the courts appoint practicing attorneys as defense counsels. The rate of the appointment of defense counsels is about 98%. In criminal cases where the accused cannot retain defense counsels by themselves, there is a system whereby the court assigns defense counsels (Court-Appointed Defense Counsel System) and the appointment ratio of court-appointed defense counsels has been around 70% in recent years. All 52 local bar associations have systems whereby suspects under arrest or their relatives can request that the local bar associations dispatch practicing attorneys. 4

5 This system is called the Duty Attorney System, and all the local bar associations had created such systems by Suspects can receive an initial interview with a practicing attorney dispatched by the local bar association for free. Cases of requests for interviews with duty attorneys amounted to about 5,600 in 1992, but that number has been increasing year by year, and in the year 2003 there were around 60,000 cases. Cases in which the suspect requested for defense by the practicing attorney after the first interview reached about 10,500 in the year of The JFBA and the 52 local bar associations have been expending about 1.3 billion yen in operating this system annually in Activities by Practicing Attorneys in Various Fields Before the revision of the Practicing Attorney Law in 2003 (in effect from April 1, 2004), practicing attorneys were prohibited in principle from assuming public posts on a full-time basis with rewards. Additionally, a permission by the local bar association was necessary in order to be a director or an employee of a private company. Due to the revision of the Practicing Attorney Law and the Articles of Association of the JFBA as part of the Judicial System Reform, such restrictions are abolished and now the system requires only registration at the local bar association for assumption of public posts or engagement in profit-making enterprises. Additionally, from January 2004, the system has been changed so that practicing attorneys can fulfill the role of civil or family affairs conciliator (previously fulfilled only by judges) while registered as practicing attorneys. Attorney practice had previously centered on activities at the courts, but now the areas where attorneys may practice have been expanded to various fields in the society and many practicing attorneys have started participating in such activities. The following is the statistical analysis on this subject: (i) After the system was created whereby practicing attorneys can be civil or family affairs conciliators while registered as practicing attorneys, approximately 30 practicing attorneys became civil conciliators or family affairs conciliators in January Around 30 more practicing attorneys are planned to become civil conciliators or family affairs conciliators in October 5

6 2004. In addition, about 10 practicing attorneys per year have become judges by deregistering from the Rolls of Lawyers in recent years. (ii) Until March 2004 practicing attorneys working as directors of private companies or in their legal affairs divisions had numbered approximately 300 to 400. As it became possible in April 2004 to engage in such duties merely by reporting to the local bar association, however, the number of these practicing attorneys engaged in for-profit duties has been increasing and reached approximately 840 as of the end of July (iii) According to the results of a questionnaire to 1,273 well-known corporations in Japan (with 536 companies replying), 99.3% of corporations execute ongoing retainer agreements with specific practicing attorneys to consult with them or request them to work on the cases where they are involved. (iv) Since November 2001, it has become possible for practicing attorneys to serve as national or regional government officials while registered as practicing attorneys, but there are few examples as yet. As of January 1, 2003, there were 22 practicing attorneys working in the legal affairs divisions of the Ministry of Justice and the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry, etc. (v) Approximately 20 to 30 councils and committees, such as a personal information protection council, a building construction dispute disposition committee and a city-planning council, have been established in 47 prefectures respectively nationwide. There are numerous practicing attorneys serving as council or committee members of the above, and, in 16 types of the councils such as information disclosure council, practicing attorneys constitute a majority of committee members. In the councils established by municipalities (approximately 3,300), approximately 880 have appointed practicing attorneys as committee members of their information disclosure councils. Additionally, many practicing attorneys have become committee members in municipalities with personal information protection committees or construction councils. (vi) In April 2004, 68 law schools were opened as a new system for training legal professions. Under this system, the qualification to be a practicing attorney, a 6

7 public prosecutor or a judge is granted to the persons who receive education for 2 or 3 years, as the case may be, at law schools (including actual legal practice training), pass the national bar examination, and then complete legal training for 1 year at the Legal Research and Training Institute. While the number of people who pass the bar examination at present is approximately 1,200 to 1,500 per year, such number is planned to increase to 3,000 per year in There are approximately 950 teachers in charge of education in actual legal practice at the 68 law schools, and among these around 700 are registered as practicing attorneys. 4. Provision of Legal Services by Bar Associations Individual practicing attorneys provide legal services to citizens. The citizens who have difficulty to receive legal services of practicing attorneys, the JFBA and local bar associations have created various systems to provide them with legal services and are also cooperate with local governments in order to guarantee access to practicing attorneys. The followings are the examples of such activities: (i) In order for citizens who do not know any individual practicing attorney to have an opportunity to receive legal counseling from practicing attorneys, the 52 local bar associations have established local legal counseling centers and dispatched practicing attorneys to the said centers where citizens are receiving legal counseling. There are 280 legal counseling centers established by the local bar associations and around 435,000 legal counseling sessions were held in these legal counseling centers in the 2001 fiscal year. Since there are few legal offices in small towns and villages (i.e.2,527 towns and villages nationwide), the local bar associations have cooperated with such local governments in establishment of legal centers. According to the results of questionnaires to such towns and villages, centers have been established for legal counseling by practicing attorneys in 28% among them. (ii) There are 50 district courts nationwide, and, together with their branches, the total number is 253. Among the regions where any district courts or their branches are located, there were 78 regions in which there was either only one 7

8 attorney or none in In April 2000, the JFBA created a system to subsidize establishment and operation of legal offices and started establishment of law offices at those areas which have only one or no practicing lawyers in order for all the regions to have two or more practicing attorneys. By June 2004, the JFBA had supported establishment of 29 law offices, and, as a result, the number of regions in which there were no or only one practicing attorneys had decreased to 55. Consequently, all the regions came to have either law offices or legal counseling centers operated by local bar associations. (iii) (iv) (v) The Duty Attorney System for suspects detained in criminal cases has already been explained in Clause 2 of Chapter 2 above. In order to attempt resolution of disputes by activation of the arbitration system, which has not been used well in Japan up to now, 14 local bar associations have, at present, established local bar association arbitration centers. The number of cases newly accepted per year is approximately 900. In order to advance easy and swift recovery of damages due to traffic accidents, which occur in great numbers, the JFBA established the Japan Federation of Bar Associations Traffic Accident Consultation Center in About 34,000 consultations per year are accepted and out-of-court settlement mediations between victims and perpetrators have been performed in around 1,400 cases per year. 8

9 Chapter 3 Judicial System Reform 1. Background of Judicial System Reform In the declaration at the General Meeting in 1990, the JFBA resolved that judicial system reform should be implemented so that the judicial system would be more accessible and easier to be used by citizens, and later on it made recommendations to reform various fields in the judicial system. In addition, the JFBA implemented itself the Duty Attorney System and establishment of legal counseling centers in various places nationwide to provide legal services by practicing attorneys to the society. The Government established the Judicial System Reform Council under the Cabinet in The Judicial System Reform Council resolved differences in gathered opinions and submitted its written recommendations to the Cabinet in June These recommendations made suggestions for reforming the whole judicial system in Japan. In December 2001 the Government established the Judicial System Reform Promotion Headquarters, composed by the Prime Minister and all cabinet members, and set a deadline of 3 years for completion of such reform. 2. Contents of Judicial System Reform From 2002 through the summer of 2004, the Judicial System Reform Promotion Headquarters submitted legislation related to judicial system reform to several sessions of the Diet, and many laws have passed the Diet, including (1) the Law Concerning the Foundation of Law Schools, (2) the Law Concerning the Foundation of the Quasi Jury System, in which judges and ordinary citizens hold criminal trials together, (3) amendment of the Criminal Procedures Law, which makes broad changes in the criminal procedure system, (4) amendment of the Administrative Case Litigation Law, making it easier to bring administrative case litigation, (5) the law creating a labor adjudication system, (6) amendments of the Practicing Attorney Law and the Special Measures Law Concerning the Handling of Legal Affairs by Foreign Lawyers, (7) the law creating a system in which judges and public prosecutors are made to experience actual practice as practicing attorneys, (8) the laws establishing judicial support 9

10 centers, independent legal bodies, which operate the court-appointed defense counsel system and legal aid projects for easier access to justice by citizens through government disbursement of management funds, and (9) the Law for Creation of Intellectual Property High Court. A part of these laws are already in effect and all are planned to become effective within 5 years from the present. The number of practicing attorneys is predicted to be 50,000 in 2018, and, at the same time, there is a plan to improve the judicial infrastructure. Concurrent with the enactment of these laws related to the Judicial System Reform, the JFBA is in the process of performing preparations for implementation of these new systems in cooperation and consultation with the Supreme Court and the Ministry of Justice. 10

11 Chapter 4 Foreign Lawyers System in Japan and JFBA 1. Legal System in Japan Special Measures Law Concerning the Handling of Legal Affairs by Foreign Lawyers (the Foreign Lawyers Act ) was legislated in Japan in 1986, making it possible for foreign lawyers, if registered at the JFBA, to engage in the limited scope of legal affairs, such as those related to the laws of the jurisdictions where the foreign lawyers are qualified to practice. This is because handling of legal affairs by persons other than practicing attorneys in Japan is prohibited in the Practicing Attorney Law. Subsequently, there have been several amendments to the Foreign Lawyers Act. At present, in the event that the requirements under the law are fulfilled such as those of 3 years experience of practice (1 year of work experience in Japan can be added in) in the place where the original qualification was acquired, of not having been subject to any penal sanction than imprisonment or the heavier, of not being bankrupt, of having intent and plan for execution of practice, of having financial basis for practicing, of being able to compensate for damages occurred, etc., the license for a qualified foreign lawyer is granted by the Ministry of Justice. Then, through registration at the JFBA and a local bar association, such foreign lawyer may practice as a licensed foreign lawyer. Currently, the number of licensed foreign lawyers registered at the JFBA is approximately Amendment of Foreign Lawyers Act and Measures taken by JFBA The Foreign Lawyers Act was amended on July 18, 2003, and a joint enterprise between a Japanese practicing attorney and/or a Japanese legal profession corporation and a licensed foreign lawyer became permissible, along with employment of a Japanese practicing attorney by a licensed foreign lawyer. This amendment of the Foreign Lawyers Act is expected to come into effect in April 1, It can be said that the amendment to the Foreign Lawyers Act resulted from realization, by the Consultation Group of Experts on the Internationalization of Legal Profession of the Judicial System Reform Promotion Headquarters, of the 11

12 Internationalization of Practicing Attorneys and Collaboration and Cooperation with Licensed Foreign Lawyers, etc. as stated in the Recommendations by the Judicial System Reform Council submitted to the Cabinet in June On the other hand, it is still set forth in the Foreign Lawyers Act that the licensed foreign attorneys are prohibited from practicing law outside their authority in excess of the duty scope as prescribed in Article 3 and below (Article 4 of the Act), and according to the amendment of the Foreign Lawyers Act, from being involved inappropriately in foreign joint legal enterprises and employment of Japanese practicing attorneys, and from ordering employed practicing attorneys under the employment relationship in connection with legal affairs outside their authority. Under the above-mentioned circumstances, the JFBA is drafting its rules and regulations rules concerning foreign joint legal enterprises, rules concerning the employment of Japanese practicing and/or licensed foreign attorneys by licensed foreign attorneys, and rules concerning naming of foreign joint legal enterprises. Moreover, a draft amendment to the related JFBA regulations are also under consideration for applying the new rules concerning practicing attorney ethics, mutatis mutandis, to licensed foreign attorneys. It is planned to submit such new rules and regulations to the Extraordinary General Meeting of the JFBA that is scheduled to be held this autumn. 12

13 Chapter 5 JFBA International Activities 1. Introduction of JFBA International Activities (i) Participation in human rights activity at the United Nations The JFBA engages in the research and study of various conventions on human rights and of a variety of international standards for human rights and, with respect to various international conventions on human rights that the Government of Japan has ratified, the JFBA makes efforts at every opportunity to improve the domestic situation concerning human rights by submitting reports that are an alternative to the reports of the Japanese government. (ii) International Cooperation Activities The JFBA started its consideration of international cooperation in The JFBA supports various countries by dispatching lecturers to seminars held in Japan by national organizations which invite trainees from various countries or by dispatching experts to Viet Nam, Laos, Indonesia and so on. In 2001, the JFBA applied to be a partnership enterprise with the Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA) and the JFBA provides assistance for the establishment and operation of the Lawyers Training Center in Cambodia and for building-up the legal aid system in Cambodia. (iii) International organizations to which the JFBA is a group member At present, the JFBA is a group member of the International Bar Association, LAWASIA and the International Criminal Bar. 2. Internationalization of Lawyers and Various Tasks (i) Movements in WTO/GATS Under the regime of the WTO (World Trade Organization) and GATS (General Agreement on Trade in Services) that commenced in 1995, legal practice by attorneys is incorporated in the legal framework of multinational deregulation for free professional services. At the WTO, the following topics are listed as subjects for negotiation: (1) reciprocal approval of qualifications of practicing attorneys, (2) internationalization of ethics of 13

14 (ii) (iii) practicing attorneys, (3) Multidisciplinary Partnerships (MDP) and liberalization of employment, (4) liberalization of investment in and ownership of law firms, (5) liberalization of the handling of local laws. Deregulation in which the profession of practicing attorneys is regarded as merely another business is likely to be implemented on a global basis, and it has become increasingly important to coordinate and exchange views with organizations of lawyers in various regions toward such global deregulation. Multidisciplinary Partnership (MDPs) In connection with the manifestation of the MDP, a problem arises in the world in which provisions that seemed to be the core of practicing attorney ethics, such as the duty of confidentiality, the prohibition of conflicts of interest or the independence of practicing attorneys, become a mere facade. Sufficient study is needed concerning the impact that the MDP has on the special characteristics and independence of the legal profession. Gatekeeper problem The Revision of 40 recommendations for the countermeasures for money laundering that was adopted by the FATF (the abbreviation for an inter-governmental organization, the Financial Activity Working Group, formed by member countries of the OECD) in 2003 relates substantially to the daily work of practicing attorneys, such as the sale and purchase of real estate or asset management. Major points of revision include obligations to confirm the identity of customers, to preserve records and to report transactions for which the identity of a client is dubious. Although the FATF recommendations do not rise to the level of a treaty, they are strict ones with measures of economic sanctions in case of failure to comply. Since the system of reporting obligation might impair the trust of citizens in practicing attorneys and prevent the proper operation of the judicial system, the JFBA has expressed its stance in opposition to the institutionalization of this system. 14

15 Attachment Supplementary Explanations Concerning the Practicing Attorney System in Japan 1. Scope of duties to be handled by practicing attorneys(article 3 of the Practicing Attorney Law) Litigation cases: Lawsuits at the Supreme Court, high courts, district courts (family courts) and summary courts (civil cases, criminal cases, administrative litigation, etc.) Non-litigation cases: cases relevant to lawsuits in which the court establishes legal relationships at its discretion Petitioning the administration for redress of grievances, such as screening requests, formal objections and requests for review Other general legal affairs: general affairs in relation to matters as set forth in the laws 2. Requirements to be a practicing attorney (Articles 4 to 7 of the Practicing Attorney Law) Principle: persons who have completed legal training as apprentices of the Legal Research and Training Institute (passing of bar examination and completion of legal training) Exceptions: (i) (ii) Persons who passed the bar examination and then possess experience as set forth in the Practicing Attorney Law (court secretaries, Cabinet Legislation Bureau councilors, etc.) and completed the training designated by the Minister of Justice Persons who passed examinations pursuant to the provisions of the Public Prosecutors Office Law, possess experience as public prosecutors and then 15

16 completed the training designated by the Minister of Justice (iii) Persons who have been Supreme Court judges 3. Registration as a practicing attorney and revocation of registration (Articles 8 to 19 of the Practicing Attorney Law) To practice as a practicing attorney, it is necessary to register in the Rolls of Lawyers maintained by the JFBA (Article 8 of the Practicing Attorney Law). Persons registering in the Rolls of Lawyers (practicing attorneys) become members of any one of the 52 local bar associations, and also members of the JFBA. The JFBA performs registration, change or revocation of registration in the Rolls of Lawyers upon request from the persons concerned. Additionally, revocation of registration is performed at the request of local bar associations or in accordance with reasons for revocation as set forth in the Practicing Attorney Law. Requests for registration in the Rolls of Lawyers are made to the JFBA via the local bar association to which the person is to belong in the future (Article 9 of the Practicing Attorney Law). The local bar association may refuse to transmit a registration request to the JFBA when a person requesting registration (a) has possibility to undermine the order or credibility of the bar association, or (b) suffers from a mental or physical disorder, or (c) was an practicing attorney in the past and underwent a disbarment disposition, and the like. The JFBA also may reject registration on grounds of such reasons. The JFBA must make a public announcement indicating details as to registrations, changes or revocations of registrations in the Rolls of Lawyers in the government gazette. 4. Practicing Attorney Disciplinary System There are some points in the system of disciplinary actions against practicing attorneys that differ from those of other countries and has special characteristics, as explained below. 16

17 (i) Anyone may request disciplinary actions against practicing attorneys Anyone who judges that there are grounds for an individual practicing attorney to undergo disciplinary action may request for a disciplinary action against the practicing attorney of the local bar associations to which he/she belongs. (ii) Investigations by Local Bar Association Discipline Maintenance Committee When a request for a disciplinary action is made to a local bar association, it is determined that the local bar association must request without fail an investigation by the Discipline Maintenance Committee of the local bar association. The Discipline Maintenance Committee is a local bar association s organ, but is also composed of judges, public prosecutors, and persons with academic knowledge, in addition to practicing attorneys. And its mission is to perform investigations of the details of cases of requests for disciplinary actions, taking no directions or orders from the President of the local bar association. In recent years, the number of disciplinary action requests received by the 52 local bar associations has reached approximately 900 to 1,100 cases per year. When the Discipline Maintenance Committee judges that any disciplinary action should not be taken as to the case as a result of the investigation, the Committee issues a finding of Not for Disciplinary Action. (iii) The system for raising objections and requesting review by persons requesting for a disciplinary action A person requesting for a disciplinary action may make a formal objection to the JFBA when a local bar association decides on Not for Disciplinary Action for the targeted practicing attorney in accordance with the finding by the Discipline Maintenance Committee. If the JFBA makes a resolution of Not for Disciplinary Action in accordance with a resolution of its Discipline Maintenance Committee, the person may make a petition for review by the Complainant s Grievance Panel instituted in the JFBA. The Complainant s Grievance Panel is an organ of the JFBA newly instituted according to the revision of the Practicing Attorney Law in 2003 (in effect on April 1, 2004). The Complainant s Grievance Panel is composed of 11 panelists, none of 17

18 whom is or ever has been a practicing attorney, a judge or a public prosecutor. The Complainant s Grievance Panel assesses whether or not cases about which petition for review have been made should be reviewed by the Disciplinary Action Committee. If the Complainant s Grievance Panel resolves that the case should be investigated by the Disciplinary Action Committee, the Disciplinary Action Committee of the local bar association will commence investigation. In other cases, petition for review are dismissed and the determination that the targeted practicing attorney is Not for Disciplinary Action" would be final. (iv) Investigation by the Disciplinary Action Committee If the Discipline Maintenance Committee resolves that there should be disciplinary actions in the case, investigation by the Disciplinary Action Committee of the local bar association will be commenced. While the Disciplinary Action Committee is a local bar association s organ, it is composed of judges, public prosecutors and persons with academic knowledge in addition to practicing attorneys, and investigates cases consisting of requests for disciplinary action without taking directions or orders from the President of the local bar association. In recent years, the number of the cases for which investigation has commenced in the Disciplinary Action Committee in the 52 local bar associations is approximately 70 to 90 per year. If the Disciplinary Action Committee resolves to discipline the targeted practicing attorney as to the case for which a request for disciplinary action has been made, the local bar association disciplines him/her. In recent years the 52 local bar associations have been performing about 50 to 70 disciplinary dispositions per year. (v) Raising of objections by persons requesting for a disciplinary action A person requesting for a disciplinary action may make a formal objection to the JFBA when the local bar association performs a disciplinary action but he/she still supposes that the disposition is considered to be inappropriately light. Additionally, a person requesting for a disciplinary action may make a formal objection to the JFBA when the local bar association decides Not for 18

19 Disciplinary Action against the targeted practicing attorney. When the JFBA performs a disciplinary disposition against the targeted practicing attorney in accordance with the finding by its Disciplinary Action Committee or decides Not for Disciplinary Action, a person requesting for the disciplinary actions may not make a formal objection against the decision of the JFBA nor file a lawsuit in court requesting disciplinary actions any more. (vi) Review requests, bringing of lawsuits by practicing attorneys undergoing disciplinary actions Those practicing attorneys who undergo disciplinary actions by the local bar associations may request for review by the JFBA if they have complaints. Practicing attorneys undergoing disciplinary actions by the JFBA can bring lawsuits before the Tokyo High Court requesting for annulment of the disciplinary actions. (Please refer to the flowchart on page20) 19

20