Pro bono publico in Latin means for the public good. It refers to legal work done without payment for those who cannot afford it. The short form is pro bono.

I’ve always wondered why the legal profession is the only one singled out for such a duty. Why is it other professions, such as accounting, architecture, medicine, engineering, land surveying, etc., do not have a duty of pro bono publico? Why isn’t there a sense about these other professions that they will work for free if their client cannot afford them but are morally or ethically deserving? Why doesn’t the general public expect services provided by these professions pro bono?

After all, there is an element of public good in those other professional services. A doctor who treats a patient ensures his illness does not spread. An architect designing a building ensures it is safe for everyone who visits and inhabits it. An accountant who keeps our books in order ensures we have an orderly account of our business, from which we pay taxes. A lawyer that gives legal advise or representation ensures compliance with the law, which promotes the order in society.

But not all lawyers do pro bono. Or feel compelled to. Many don’t. Some do. Those that do tend to feel strongly about a cause, legal rights or believe a particular state of law to be the true position. And they are likelier to be in litigation as opposed to those on the advisory side of legal practice.

Others do it for ulterior motives, such as deliberately associating themselves with noble causes for marketing and public relations purposes. If you see a glossy and expensive looking compilation showcasing the firm’s pro bono work, that work was done for more for profile than the public good. The firm will justify it by saying it is a win-win proposition – we get the profile, and you get someone to do the work. But that attitude pollutes the pro bono nature of the work with pro suo commodo, self-interest.

By my count, if we seek to get more out of a pro bono case beyond our own satisfaction and the reasonably foreseeable publicity that arises out of the case, it loses its pro bono element and becomes pro suo commodo. We cannot serve two masters.

What is not often discussed or known to the general public is the price of serving the master known as pro bono. It is an incredibly heavy burden on a lawyer or a firm, or both. Heavy because pro bono work, especially involving public interest or constitutional matters, tends to be complex, challenging and difficult. The public interest work I am called upon to do is often more complicated and heavy compared to the usual run of paid work.

That complexity translates into arduous work: reading and understanding many cases, distinguishing them, appreciating how they relate to each other, interviewing the client, formulating their story and the legal issues arising, evaluating the state of the law and their legal position, drafting the legal challenge, refining it, drafting the legal arguments. All this takes expertise, time, effort, energy, emotion and psyche, not to mention other resources like photocopying, electricity, and labour as well. A huge amount.

Pro bono work is great fun and blesses us with a sense of purpose, but there’s no money. That is the opportunity cost of doing pro bono work. For every pro bono work I do, I do not simply spend; I also cannot earn. From a financial standpoint, I am losing not just potential fees but also the opportunity to earn.

It is paid work that keeps my staff and lawyers paid, settles the firm’s monthly expenses, and ensure the firm continues. The firm does not run on thank yous, well-wishes, fresh air and sunshine. Our suppliers and vendors do not accept that as payment. They don’t care that the work we do is for the greater good, that is contributes positively to society.

Worse, doing pro bono work doesn’t necessarily get you paid work. On the contrary, having a reputation for doing work pro bono, gets you more pro bono work. I once attended a party and met my father’s friend. He was a fan and supporter of the public interest work I get up to with my friends. When I turned up at his dinner table, he heartily announced, ‘Fahri here does a lot of public interest work. If you are facing any serious legal problems, look him up! He does work pro bono!‘ I quickly thanked him and corrected him that I don’t do pro bono anymore.

Which is for the most part true. As a general rule, I don’t do pro bono cases. I reduced pro bono files a few years into setting up my firm. I will only take up pro bono work if several conditions are met.

First, my firm is in a financially stable and solid position. We have to be earning and somewhat comfortably. A firm cannot run on pro bono files. Second, the legal issue or cause must be one I am concerned about or support. If I am going to do work for free, it is going to align with my beliefs or my idea of fun. I am not going to waste my time doing work for something I don’t believe in or feel strongly about. Third, those working with me are up for doing it pro bono. I work with a team these days and if my team is not interested, neither am I. Fourth, the pro bono client is impecunious and in a challenging position. But this consideration is now a minor one simply because there are many in that situation. There is no end to it and the reality is we cannot help everyone.

I used to be big about doing work pro bono. However, I have come to appreciate that pro bono work is like any other thankless job: there is no money, little thanks if not ingratitude, we are forgotten after the case is over, we have to find other work to sustain our pro bono work, and even though we care, few care about us. Although it is fun and provides us great mental stimulation, all we can truly content ourselves with pro bono work is the pleasure we get from doing the work and what it achieves. To help for anything more beyond that is to be disappointed and made miserable by the experience.

That is the price of pro bono.