Advocacy Blues and the Dark Side
Wednesday, July 16th, 2008Until recently, persistence had connotations of “goal centred achievement”, “never say never”, “if at first you don’t succeed try, try again”. Slipping in under the cover of darkness is the new handbook, officially endorsed by the relevant state authority … and therefore recognised in the legal sense.
Launched (quietly) in August 2007 was the Unreasonable Persistence (Section 3.1) proscription. Notably, there is no indication as to who is to be the arbiter of “unreasonable”. And strangely, the same website still includes the instruction to “be persistent” when making a complaint.
As a Canadian reader of WLW noted: “I was particularly amused (and worried) by the Interim Practice Manual’s explanation that: “Some complainants have an unrealistic expectation that significant action will be taken as a result of their complaint, …”
Indeed. So what would be the point of raising an issue, unless there was at least some glimmer of hope in having the matter appropriately addressed? No matter how elegantly expressed, “Go away” is not appropriate, effective, rationale nor acceptable. So who does one complain to when the eratz Ethics Police aren’t interested?
Any and all suggestions greatly appreciated.