The story of ex-politicians involved in lawyers did not have a happy ending

The world of business and, specifically, that of companies is periodically related to the legal world, for various reasons.

We can synthesize the most relevant.

In the first place, by requiring the advice of lawyers to comply with (and circumvent) mandatory tax, labor and other laws.

Secondly, to enter into contracts and other legal relationships with public and private operators.

Thirdly, to defend themselves in contentious matters, as plaintiffs or defendants, whether civil, commercial, administrative or labor.

And fourthly, to defend themselves in the criminal jurisdiction against complaints or lawsuits that may affect them or to file them if appropriate in their case.

Well, it is assumed that, for this, companies, including law firms that function as such, need professionals who are as qualified as possible.

With the necessary technical knowledge and practical experience. Not a mere theoretical preparation without yet contrasting.

This is fundamental in the world of law and, for this reason, there are practices in the corresponding schools for judges and prosecutors after approving the opposition, before practicing.

For this matter, today the tests for access to the legal profession are established, before being able to practice. The mere academic qualification of a bachelor’s degree or degree is not enough, as was the case until a few years ago.

Well then, if the law firms –law firms– need people with professional competence, why do they sometimes hire politicians, without noticeable experience in the legal profession when they cease to be active in politics?

IT WAS NOT A NORMAL CONTRACT

It is not a normal contract, understandable. But it is economically oversized.

Obviously this can only be for two reasons: the first, to attract customers, given its supposed multiple relationships; the second, to influence contracting with public administrations.

If the neutral obtaining of clients is justifiable, it is no longer so when those clients are administrations related to the former politician.

And even less can it be justified that what is intended is for it to influence the contracting or awarding of public services with the aim of increasing the business volume of the firm that contracted them.

Corruption is always close to this area, close to the crime of influence peddling of articles 428 and following of the Penal Code. Closely related to administrative prevarication and, even, it is possible to incur in the crimes of corruption in the businesses of article 286 bis and following of the same Code.

This comes on account of the embarrassing spectacle, which is being given by two ex-politicians and a well-known law firm upon termination of their contractual relationship.

Nobody here is innocent, according to the public information provided.

Why did the firm want some lawyers – at least one of them without enough accredited legal practice, with an astronomical salary – whom it raised to the top of the firm?

Undoubtedly it cannot be for them to handle contentious matters or qualified advice, as we said before. At least until you get enough practice.

What legal experience could ex-politicians turned lawyers offer to respond to these demands?

The reality is that they were hired – I repeat – to attract clients, as high-level salespeople. To increase the level of firam business. Not as managers of a business that they did not know. That is the reality and no other. It can be seen even by a blind man.

I just have to say that it is sad and discouraging for any young graduate or lawyer, already professionally prepared, to see that what some law firms value most is not the preparation, nor the effort of specialization and study, but the mere image and influences.

This obviously would not have been externalized if the former politicians had been able to achieve their extra-legal objectives, which apparently has not been possible. They have all been exposed.

Regrettable.

Related to this is the serious danger offered by the cases of revolving doors of dismissed senior positions in the Public Administration when incompatibilities are not respected by dismissing senior executive positions and moving scandalously to the private sector.

I will try to return to this topic. It is clear that the influential do not want to lose or reduce their sphere of influence, their “lobbying”, which produces so many economic benefits. But if things are wrong, they must be changed. For the good of all.