Entry details

Curzon
Author

Curzon

Date

July 25th, 2006

Tags

, ,

Comments

8 Comments so far.
Add yours.

The Americanization of East Asian Legal Education

Since the 1950s, Japan’s bar association has operated a very simple procedure for becoming a lawyer: pass the bar exam. That’s it. No law schools. No pre-exam training. Applicants did not even have to graduate from a university.

While that might sound liberal, the results were not egalitarian. The pass rate has typically varied between 1% to 3% a year, and half of all attorneys are from Japan’s top five universities. More than 90% have undergraduate degrees in law, the average attorney passes the exam on the fifth try, and the average age of admittance to the bar bar is 28. That means many, many hopeful attorneys wasted years of their lives studying hard for the exam, many of whom had to give up in their 30s (or even 40s), having lost much of their young professional lives.

Yet this system is on the way out. Japan took a major step towards revolutionizing its legal sector in 2004 when it opened American-style law schools. The standard course is three years, or two years for students with undergraduate degrees in law. The first “new bar exam” was held this past May, and the results will be issued in the fall with an expected pass rate of 55%. (For comparison purposes, that’s higher than California.) Non-law school hopefuls can still take the “old bar exam” until it is phased out in 2011.

Most of you are probably thinking, “so what?” But this is a major step in changing how lawyers are admitted to the bar in Japan. In the meantime, we should see a slow expansion of the number of lawyers in Japan. This is good news for Japan’s business world as well—the lack of competent business attorneys has meant a massive influx of foreign attorneys, who have maneuvered into a position where they come close to dominating the major transactions in the Tokyo legal world.

Japan is not alone. Believe it or not, South Korea is following in Japan’s steps. Although plans to open these law schools in 2008 have been delayed, reports suggest that Korea is ready to open American-style law schools in 2009, which mean that Korea, which has a remarkably similar legal sector to Japan (can you guess why?), will be following Japan in following the American model. What does this mean for East Asia? Big change—and a more transparent legal system that will look a lot like the United States.

SIDENOTE: I’m away for the next few days, posting to resume on Friday.

Comments to this entry

Mutantfrog
July 25, 2006
2:24 am
Don't forget that Korea's current president, Roh Moo-hyun, actually passed the bar over there without even going to college. There is something a little sad about losing the possibility of such somewhat romantic rags to riches storeis (at least as romantic as becoming a lawyer can be), but in practical terms increasing the number of avaliable lawyers will probably help make Japan's legal system more responsive and useful, for both business and private citizens.

I don't want to see Japan become as litigious as the US, but it certainly should be made easier to file a lawsuit in cases of genuine damage.
Darin
July 25, 2006
10:57 am
Don't forget Sakuragi sensei from Dragon Zakura. I wonder if Roh was inspired by the manga. ;)
snow
July 25, 2006
3:48 pm
I'm not sure if having more lawyers is ultimately a good thing for a society, but in South Korea, such changes would hopefully make the legal system more open, professional and transparent.
Dan tdaxp
July 26, 2006
12:22 am
Ah, yet another country junks a mentoring-based system which focuses on training lawyers to do their job with a certificate-based system which limits entry to the profession, easing competition to lawyers who are already in.

I would make a sarcastic, Lounsbury-style comment, but reality made it for me.
lirelou
July 26, 2006
5:02 am
I assume that the two legal systems are similar because they are both based upon German civil law, and only coincidentally because Japan annexed Korea. I have never confirmed it, but I recall one civilian professor mentioning that the German advisor to the Korean government who helped draw up their civil code had been granted Korean citizenship. As a point of fact, back in the 1960s a great many U.S. states did not require a law degree, and allowed candidates who had clerked for five years or more in a courthouse or attorney's office to take the Bar. At that time, many lawyers were not graduate degree holders, to include one Harvard attorney I met. Having more lawyers is always a bad thing, unless it's oneself who ends up needing a lawyer.
Won Joon Choe
July 26, 2006
4:37 pm
I wholeheartedly agree with Snow's pithy statement.
Tiu Fu Fong
July 27, 2006
6:14 am
Will American-style law schools mean an influx of American-style drafting? That would be less than optimal for business. American legal drafting lags far behind most of the English-speaking world of lawyers, as American-trained lawyers suffer from numerous sins, including:

(a) unduly archaic, complex language that could easily be replaced with plain English that everyone could understand;

(b) an aversion to good formatting, meaning that you get great slabs of user-unfriendly text;

(c) an addiction to capitalising every letter in certain words and entire clauses, notwithstanding that capitalisation doesn't make a word/clause any more legally effective and unseemly to the eye;

(d) a kitchen-sink approach to drafting, meaning that you end up with a 50 page document containing all manner of boilerplate clauses where a 15 page document would suffice; and

(e) an incredibly US-centric view of the law, even when practising outside the US, which makes them think that references to US statutes and use of NY legal principles are the norm even when there is no US nexus.

All lawyers suffer from the above sins to some extent, but US lawyers far out-sin other lawyers operating in international deals in the international business world. Receiving a US-style document in my in-box inspires nothing but groans.

As for dealing with US trained, NY-accented lawyers - that's a rant about unnecessarily adversarial approaches, US-centric thinking, lack of empathy and petty point scoring that I'll save for another day.
Won Joon Choe
July 27, 2006
3:45 pm
Mr. Fong,

As a general matter, law--even if arcane and esoteric--is to be preferred over lawlessness that is South Korea.

Regards.