The Free State Bar Council of advocates thought it was a “momentous step” to establish a women’s desk under the council’s transformation committee, but one local junior advocate says “transformation of women is old news and has been exploited to death”.
Armed with 27 years of practice under her belt, junior counsel advocate Germa Wright says the recently approved women’s desk “denigrates enlightened, strong, and independent women”.
This was especially true 29 years after the “New South Africa,” said Wright, where women lawyers had proved they were competent enough to make it without special treatment.
“Dragging female issues into transformation was a massive step backward,” she said in a letter dated Tuesday this week, adding that the proposal “colours issues relevant to women, in my mind, with a dark, unwelcome, and utterly one-dimensional hue”.
The letter was addressed to the bar council; female members of the Free State bar; and female pupils in 2023.
Contacted to verify the document’s authenticity, Wright insisted that Sunday World disclose its source before dropping the call. However, she confirmed that she was the author.
Wright quoted from the bar council report that a “women’s desk” had been approved in March. The report states that the women advocates who had been approached with the idea met it “with much excitement and interest”.
She denied the statement as “misleading”, saying when she was approached, she “voiced several points of criticism and apprehension”.
“And I was very vocal in my opposition to the idea,” she said.
On the contrary, she insisted that her name “never” be mentioned in connection with it, adding that several women she talked to after the document was circulated were less than enthusiastic about its handling.
“I will not mention the names of these women, as I am not so arrogant as to speak on behalf of others. I can only hope that they will have the integrity and backbone [dare I say ‘balls’?] to speak up themselves.”
Wright was also critical that the proposal or guidelines for the initiative mentioned that “the growth of women in the profession is often stagnated by a lack of opportunities”, mentioning that the days when female advocates got less work were long gone.
“From their first day at the bar females receive briefs from the state attorney’s office [especially black females].
“It was further noticeable during my stints as acting judge during 2021 to what extent the motion court is ruled by the female members of the bar. If you are good enough, you will be briefed, regardless of gender.”
She continued: “I have noticed that several senior counsels make a point of using female advocates as their juniors, regardless of experience or seniority. Junior female members serve on all kinds of committees and organisations, exposing them to contacts with attorneys and possible clients.
“What more do they want? Three women from this bar currently hold permanent positions on the Free State bench. Several hold acting stints on a regular basis. A number of females held [or are holding] contractual assignments as magistrates.”
She conceded that some advocates could be briefed less than others, “but there are other factors that cause that situation – not gender”, adding that “several male advocates experience the same thing”.
She added that she was “shocked that there are women who feel that it is necessary to express such a sentiment. Why not simply tell the world what they really seem to think: Women are inferior to men and need more training than men to become decent advocates? This would of course be an absolute lie.”
Wright said no woman was inferior to any man and as far as there may be advocates who need more training, it was not because of their gender, noting that it would be due to some personal shortcomings or lack of aptitude.
“Not all lawyers are cut out to perform as counsel. To my mind, several of the male members of the bar are not cut out to be advocates.
“Should there be individual women who feel that they are not properly or adequately trained, that is their individual problem, not something shared by the majority of the female members of the bar. And it should be addressed on an individual basis.”
Unfortunately, she said, the proposal did not differentiate.
“And in as far as the bar council accepted the contents of the document as the basis for their decision, they seemed to have accepted as a fact that all female advocates are not up to the standard.”
Throughout her career, Wright has fought to show that women could do just as well as men in court.
“And I have done so successfully [as have many of the other females at the bar]. I am an advocate, not a ‘woman’ or ‘female’ advocate. And this is true without extra or special training or coaching.
“It thus hurts to know that the writer[s] of the proposal, the transformation committee, and the bar council negated my battles and wins with one decision.”
She added that the profession was returning to outdated sentiments which erroneously advocate that women are inferior to men.
“For those women who need a leg-up to be on par with the men [as they see it], good luck! And to those women who are competent enough to make it without special treatment, hats off to you, ladies. Please show your strength by speaking up.”
Follow @SundayWorldZA on Twitter and @sundayworldza on Instagram, or like our Facebook Page, Sunday World, by clicking here for the latest breaking news in South Africa.
