The Canadian rules of professional conduct constrain lawyers’ speech. Among other things, the rules impose on lawyers a duty to ‘encourage public respect for and try to improve the administration of justice’. The commentary to this rule specifies that ‘a lawyer should avoid criticism that is petty, intemperate or unsupported by a bona fide belief in its real merit’. It asserts that ‘in the eyes of the public, professional knowledge lends weight to the lawyer’s judgments or criticism’. Moreover, it explains that this duty ‘is not restricted to the lawyer’s professional activities but is a general responsibility resulting from the lawyer’s position in the community’. The rules also impose a more general duty of civility. Existing jurisprudence recognises that lawyers have ‘a pivotal role in ensuring the accountability and transparency of the judiciary’, a role that will sometimes include public criticism of courts and tribunals. However, these rules against improper criticism have been determined to constitute a justifiable limitation on the constitutional right to freedom of expression contained in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms – at least when applied to practising lawyers. The constitutionality and wisdom of these rules are far less clear as they apply to nonpractising lawyers. (Canadian Law Societies typically allow lawyers who are not engaged in the practice of law to remain licensees, subject to reduced annual fees and exempt from purchasing professional liability insurance, with the option of returning to active practice in the future.) Some non-practising lawyers serve in high-profile roles such as political commentators, politicians or academics. In recent years, lawyers in such roles have made public statements that appear to engage these rules of professional conduct. However, none of these situations went beyond the tribunal level, and so no Canadian court has yet determined the constitutionality of these rules in these non-practice contexts.

中文翻译：

---

加拿大专业监管的局限性：律师协会和非执业律师

加拿大的职业行为规则限制了律师的言论。除其他事项外，这些规则规定律师有责任“鼓励公众尊重并努力改善司法”。对该规则的评论指出，“律师应避免小气、不节制或不受对其真正价值的真诚信念支持的批评”。它声称“在公众眼中，专业知识对律师的判断或批评具有重要意义”。此外，它解释说，这项职责“不仅限于律师的专业活动，而是由律师在社区中的地位所产生的一般责任”。这些规则还规定了更一般的文明义务。现有的判例承认律师“在确保司法机构的问责制和透明度方面发挥着关键作用”，这一作用有时包括对法院和法庭的公开批评。然而，这些反对不当批评的规则已被确定为对《加拿大权利和自由宪章》所载言论自由的宪法权利构成合理限制——至少在适用于执业律师时。这些规则的合宪性和智慧远没有那么明确，因为它们适用于非执业律师。（加拿大法律协会通常允许不从事法律业务的律师继续持有执照，但年费会降低，并且可以免于购买职业责任保险，并且可以选择在未来恢复积极执业。) 一些非执业律师担任高调的角色，例如政治评论员、政治家或学者。近年来，担任此类职务的律师发表了似乎涉及这些职业行为规则的公开声明。然而，这些情况都没有超出法庭级别，因此加拿大法院尚未确定这些规则在这些非实践环境中的合宪性。