Abstract:
The staggering ‘skewed briefing patterns’ in the legal profession have been diagnosed as the mishaps that have shadowed the progression of women in the legal profession, along with the lingering sex and gender stereotyping and other interweaving discriminatory practices which destain women from accessing high-profile briefs due to misogynistic perspectives about the roles of men and women. These mishaps are set to be addressed through utilisation of qualitative desktop method that is phenomenologically foregathered from the trilogy of cross-cutting aims and objectives of this research. These issues are as follows: Firstly, the research found that both international and regional obligations make provisions for gender clause and affirmative action strategies. On the one hand, it was found that the state is obliged to implement affirmative action strategies to empower suitable female counsels by virtue of section 9(2) of the Constitution. Nevertheless, on the other hand, the concept of transformation affords ‘equal opportunity’ between men and women to compete equally for briefs. Secondly, this study found that, although the Draft Legal Sector Code, 2022 (‘Draft LSC’) is lauded for bringing transformation by setting targets/measures for procurement of legal services, it is a mere revitalisation of the ghosting Legal Services Sector Charter, 2007 (‘LSSC’) and a special measure intended to address racial discrimination and not gender. Thirdly, this research argues that the state must implement a flexible policy for briefing patterns in the legal profession
