Chapter 4 • Independence and Impartiality of Judges, Prosecutors and Lawyers As already mentioned, every year many lawyers are killed, threatened, intimidated or harassed in various ways in order to prevail upon them to relinquish the defence of clients seeking to claim their rights and freedoms. It is therefore essential that Governments do their utmost to protect lawyers against this kind of interference in the exercise of their professional duties. ***** The African Commission has concluded that the right to defence as guaranteed by article 7(1)(c) of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights was violated in a case where two defence teams had been “harassed into quitting the defence of the accused persons”.136 ***** Another important rule is laid down in Principle 18, according to which “lawyers shall not be identified with their clients or their clients’ causes as a result of discharging their functions”. The question of lawyers’ identification with their clients has been dealt with by the Special Rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers, who in 1998 for instance stated that he viewed “with some concern the increased number of complaints concerning Governments’ identification of lawyers with their clients’ cause”, adding that lawyers “representing accused persons in politically sensitive cases are often subjected to such accusations”.137 However, “identifying lawyers with their clients’ causes, unless there is evidence to that effect, could be construed as intimidating and harassing the lawyers concerned”. According to the Special Rapporteur, “Governments have an obligation to protect such lawyers from intimidation and harassment”.138 If Governments have evidence to the effect that lawyers identify themselves with their clients’ cause, it is, as stressed by the Special Rapporteur, “incumbent on [them] to refer the complaints to the appropriate disciplinary bodies of the legal profession”,139 where, as described below, they will be dealt with in accordance with due process of law. The question of identification of lawyers with their clients is particularly relevant when they are called upon to represent human rights defenders. However, here too lawyers must be given the same guarantees of security enabling them to carry out their professional duties independently and efficiently without governmental or other undue interference. Again, any alleged professional misconduct should be referred to the established independent organs. With regard to guarantees for the functioning of lawyers, Principle 19 of the Basic Principles also provides that 136 ACHPR, International Pen, Constitutional Rights Project, Interights (on behalf of Ken Saro-Wiwa Jr. And Civil Liberties Organisation) v. Nigeria, Communications Nos. 137/94, 139/94, 154/96 and 161/97, decision adopted on 31 October 1998, para. 101; text of the decision to be found at the following web site: http://www1.umn.edu/humanrts/africa/comcases/137-94_139-94_154-96_161-97.html. 137 UN doc. E/CN.4/1998/39, Report of the Special Rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers, para. A.1 of the Conclusions. 138 Ibid., loc. cit. 139 Ibid., para. 2 152 Human Rights in the Administration of Justice: A Manual on Human Rights for Judges, Prosecutors and Lawyers