Interaction of State and Public Structures in The Field of Legal Aid

Burlachenko Petro Dmytrovych

doi:10.37547/tajpslc/Volume07Issue06-02

The American Journal of Political Science Law and Criminology

09

https://www.theamericanjournals.com/index.php/tajpslc

TYPE

Original Research

PAGE NO.

09-16

DOI

10.37547/tajpslc/Volume07Issue06-02

OPEN ACCESS

SUBMITED

05 April 2025

ACCEPTED

24 May 2025

PUBLISHED

04 June 2025

VOLUME

Vol.07 Issue 06 2025

CITATION

Burlachenko Petro Dmytrovych. (2025). Interaction of State and Public
Structures in The Field of Legal Aid. The American Journal of Political
Science Law and Criminology, 7(06), 09

–

16.

https://doi.org/10.37547/tajpslc/Volume07Issue06-02

COPYRIGHT

© 2025 Original content from this work may be used under the terms
of the creative commons attributes 4.0 License.

Interaction of State
and Public
Structures in The
Field of Legal Aid

Burlachenko Petro Dmytrovych

Chairman of the Public Human Rights Organization “Center of Law”

Cherkasy, Ukraine

Abstract:

The article presents an analysis of the

interaction between state and public structures in the
field of legal assistance to ensure access to justice for
socially vulnerable groups. In this article, the
mechanisms of cooperation, barriers, and strategies to
enhance effectiveness under conditions of intensified
social stratification and legal complexity will be
examined. The relevance of this work can be attributed
to the enormous scale of the problem: 5 billion people
lack access to justice, and 92% of low-income Americans
face unresolved legal issues. The methodological
framework employed here comprises a comparative
analysis of three legal systems (India, the USA, and
Australia), conducted through a systematic review of 13
sources (international acts, statistics, and cases),
supplemented by content data evaluation. It was
observed that state aid governed by statutes provides
fundamental support. However, it comes with
bureaucracy and underfunding. Key findings underscore
the need for reforms that can fundamentally eliminate
systemic barriers. Major issues include gender
differences, significant delays in immigration courts, and
insufficient free assistance. The successful plans that
halted large evictions by teaming up in the Right to
Counsel program in New York City reveal something
else. Suggestions include more cash, online help, law
school, and focused things for weak people (like
migrants and ethnic groups). This article is useful for
attorneys, human rights advocates, lawmakers, and

The American Journal of Political Science Law and Criminology

10

https://www.theamericanjournals.com/index.php/tajpslc

The American Journal of Political Science Law and Criminology

scholars who want to promote justice, access, and social
fairness.

Keywords:

legal assistance, government agencies,

public organizations, access to justice, vulnerable
groups, gender disparities.

Introduction:

Legal aid is one of the most crucial

components of access to justice, which has been
incorporated into various provisions of international
legal instruments through the channels of the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights (Article 10) and the
European Convention on Human Rights (Article 6) [1, 2].

In today’s reality, cha

racterized by growing social

stratification and complex legal systems, the relevance it
previously held now reaches much higher levels. This
holds particularly for the most vulnerable segments of
the population - people with low incomes, migrants, and
people who have faced human rights violations.
Approximately 5 billion people lack fundamental access
to justice worldwide [3].

At the national level, the situation also shows grave
troubles. For instance, low-income Americans get no or
inadequate legal help in 92% of their major civil legal
issues [4].

Formed human rights groups in public, such as the ACLU
and the Law Center within the United States, or Liberty
in the UK, play a great role in solving these problems by
offering free legal advice and representation in court.
Their work not only resolves individual cases but also
brings about systemic change through strategic litigation
and advocacy for reform.

A study into the value of legal aid and the ways to deliver
it remains relevant, as it helps identify ways to improve
the efficacy of legal systems and ensure equal justice. A
consideration of such interactions has tangible
consequences for creating public policies that focus on
eliminating obstacles and enhancing legal services for
every segment of society.

MATERIALS AND METHODOLOGY

The interactions between the state and public structures
concerning legal aid were studied based on 13 binding
international legal instruments, statistical reports,
scientific articles, case law, and media publications.
Forming the theoretical base were fundamental

documents, including the Universal Declaration of
Human Rights [1] and the European Convention on
Human Rights [2], which enshrine the rights to a fair trial
and access to legal aid. Size of the global problem-
information from Namati [3] and The Justice Gap Report
[4]. This study was conducted methodologically by
comparing the legal systems of various countries based
on their respective models of legal aid. Public-private
partnerships expand the reach of services in India [8, 9]
and New York [12]; however, they also require
sustainable funding. A paper by A. Mukherjee [5] has
confirmed that legal organizations and online platforms
help close the 'legal gap' for vulnerable groups, and R.P.
Khubalkar's paper [6] has shown that digital adaptation
is necessary for traditional schemes. Statistics and case
data - information from NSW Legal Aid [11] and IAALS
[13] revealed gender and ethnic disparities in accessing
aid. At the same time, materials on the overburdened
US immigration courts [10] highlighted the roles of
NGOs in alleviating the burden on state institutions. The
study, which combines information from global legal
tools,

country

actions,

and

scholarly

works,

demonstrates that despite the success of public-private
teamwork and digital methods in increasing access, the
link between the government and public bodies in the
area of legal assistance still faces fundamental issues.

The research methodology employed here involves a
comparative legal analysis of the various models of legal
aid in different countries, which facilitated the
identification of shared trends and typical features. A
case study examining New York programs [12] and
Indian initiatives [8, 9] was conducted to evaluate the
effectiveness of public-private partnerships, considering
their funding structure, service coverage, and
beneficiary feedback. Statistical analysis of report data
[3, 4, 11, 13] and judicial practice evidence helped
quantify the disproportions in access to legal aid by
gender and ethnicity.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

It encompasses the activities that ensure the protection
of the rights and legitimate interests of individuals and
entities before judicial or other bodies, as well as in the
course of other legal actions. They include consultations
and court representation, document drafting, and other
forms of support [5]. The two main divisions are state

The American Journal of Political Science Law and Criminology

11

https://www.theamericanjournals.com/index.php/tajpslc

The American Journal of Political Science Law and Criminology

legal assistance and public legal assistance. State legal
assistance forms part of the state mechanism that
provides provisions to citizens through budgetary
expenses organized by state bodies. It comprises
assistance provided at various stages of the court
process, such as free legal advice, help with drafting
claims, and offering legal support in court to those who
cannot afford to hire private lawyers. A key point about
government legal aid is that it is typically enshrined in
legislation and available to all citizens, regardless of their
financial situation, provided such actions are permitted
by the applicable laws [6]. On the other hand, private
legal aid is provided by non-governmental organizations,
various human rights organizations, public associations,
and individuals who offer legal assistance. This private
aid can be organized on both voluntary and charitable
grounds; it is not financed by the government and may
be rendered either freely or with partial payment. Public
legal aid is usually intended to rescue citizens who
belong to vulnerable categories. This will include the
impoverished, refugees, ethnic minorities, and disabled
people. The fundamental difference between public and
state legal aid is that the former typically plays a
subordinate role within the legal system and only
addresses aspects that may be inadequately serviced by
government agencies at some point in time. For
example, assistance regarding human rights or saving
the rights of groups facing discrimination.

Legal aid can primarily be classified into state legal aid
and public legal aid. Although their funding sources and
organizations differ, they form essential components in
the provision of justice through the law in any society.
Therefore, it is essential to note that both forms of legal
aid should work in close cooperation to ensure that
complete and effective justice is attained, particularly
for socially vulnerable groups within the population.

The state plays a significant role in providing legal aid as
one of its duties, recognizing that all citizens must have
equal rights before the law and access to justice. The
primary instrument for this is the establishment and
maintenance of a state legal aid system, which provides
services to citizens who lack sufficient resources to hire
private attorneys. In many places, laws in statutory acts
control state legal aid. Such acts not only legislate the
criteria upon which an individual can be eligible for aid
but also outline the procedure for granting it. Equally

important is that these programs will include financing
for lawyers and attorneys who will represent citizens in
court, in addition to organizing advisory services and
establishing other avenues of assistance to ensure the
availability of legal services to every population
segment.

The provision of legal aid by the state forms an
important aspect of state functions. If a citizen cannot
afford to pay for a lawyer, the relevant state bodies have
an obligation to ensure that he/she is provided with a
defender. This function considerably extends not only
the rights of citizens but also the fundamental principle
of justice that underpins democratic legal systems. State
legal aid covers not only criminal cases but also civil and
administrative disputes, enabling citizens to secure their
rights when taking or prohibiting actions. Public human
rights organizations shall also play a significant role in
this system, providing citizens with access to human
rights protection and support. These may fill in the
state's legal aid functions and thus can directly impact
human rights policy development. The public
organizations are most likely to protect the rights of
vulnerable and marginalized groups of the population,
such as ethnic minorities, refugees, people with
disabilities, etc., and other categories in need of special
protection. Unlike state legal assistance, which may be
limited by the framework of regulatory legal acts, public
organizations often direct their activities toward solving
specific social problems that are not always considered
in legislative initiatives. Human rights organizations can
provide legal aid, but they can also work in advocacy,
improve legal education, and monitor human rights
compliance.

These

organizations

have

active

cooperation with international human rights structures,
which gives them an opportunity to influence the
national legal system through raising important issues
and drawing attention to violations of citizens' rights. It
should be acknowledged that public organizations also
participate in reforming the legal system by demanding
improvements in legal norms and conditions for the
protection of human rights. In this way, state and public
human rights organizations complement each other in
providing legal assistance. The state lays the foundation
for creating and maintaining a legal assistance system
through financing and regulating its services. At the
same time, public organizations play an active role in the

The American Journal of Political Science Law and Criminology

12

https://www.theamericanjournals.com/index.php/tajpslc

The American Journal of Political Science Law and Criminology

development of human rights practices and the
protection of citizens' rights, particularly those who, due
to certain reasons, do not receive adequate support
from the state system.

Interactions between government agencies and public
human rights organizations involve a multifaceted
process, comprising cooperation, partnership, and
control as its fundamental components. The degree to
which these forms of interaction are manifested not only
determines the nature of relationships between the
parties but also their effect on the effectiveness of legal
assistance rendered to citizens. In some instances,
cooperation manifests in joint projects and initiatives
aimed at improving human rights situations, developing
recommendations, and participating in legislative
changes. Such cooperation includes participation by
public organizations in creating and improving legal
frameworks, such as those related to legal assistance,
and preparing or disseminating information necessary to
enhance citizen and legal literacy. A partnership
between the government and public human rights
organizations should be viewed as creating sustainable,
long-term relationships, where each party invests efforts
towards attaining a common objective: improving the
level of legal assistance and protection accorded to
citizens' rights. This may involve supplying public
organizations with resource support to implement their
programs, while human rights groups offer expert
assistance either in developing legal acts or monitoring
their implementation. In such partnerships, strengths
are shared; government agencies have authority and
resources, whereas public organizations have flexibility,
direct contact with target groups, and somewhat
independent actions [7].

Control, as part of interaction, involves watching and
assessing the actions taken by government agencies and
public organizations regarding legal assistance.
Therefore, it is necessary that both interacting parties
follow the established standards and norms, which

would help ensure the efficiency and justice of the aid
rendered. Government agencies may exercise control
over human rights organizations through legal
regulation and oversight of their adherence to
established rules. Similarly, public organizations may
exert control over government action through
independent investigations and reports, as well as utilize
the mechanisms of public pressure to improve state
institutions.

Therefore, the forms of interaction that include
cooperation, collaboration, and coordination are
fundamental aspects in organizing an effective system
of legal assistance. They contribute to ensuring higher
quality and accessibility in the protection of human
rights for the citizenry, while also sustaining relations
between government agencies and public organizations,
which will further strengthen the rule of law and human
rights protection.

The interface between government and civil society
concerning legal aid is an important aspect through
which justice can be effectively ensured. Although
numerous

legal,

financial,

and

organizational

impediments exist to the effectiveness of this interface,
in India, the provision of legal aid is governed by the
Legal Services Act of 1987 [8]. Major impediments
comprise a lack of legal awareness and education.
Another study [9] found that more than 80% of the
population in India (1.3 billion) was entitled to avail of
free legal aid; however, only 15 million took advantage
of this, which is significantly less than the number during
the same period since NALSA started functioning, which
came into existence in 1995. Additionally, financial
constraints play a significant role. The U.S. immigration
courts currently have a backlog of 3.7 million cases
across the country, which symbolizes systemic
inefficiencies [10]. In Australia [11], for example, a total
of 18.33% of requests made by women were rejected
between 2024 and 2025, compared to men, whose
rejection rate was only 11.12% (Figure 1).

The American Journal of Political Science Law and Criminology

13

https://www.theamericanjournals.com/index.php/tajpslc

The American Journal of Political Science Law and Criminology

Fig. 1. Percentage of requests accepted and rejected out of all requests submitted by gender (compiled by

author based on [11])

At the same time, out of the total number of
applications, women constituted only 32.39%, while
men formed 65.33%. However, the ratio of approved
applications roughly corresponds to the ratio of
applications submitted; the situation with refusals is

different: of refusals, 44.87% were female and 54.89%
male (Figure 2) [11].

Fig. 2. Received, accepted, and rejected requests by gender (compiled by author based on [11])

The study [10] classified legal aid recipients in Australia
into three broad categories: civil, criminal, and family
law. The distribution within civil law is quite equitable,
with men making up 50.44% and women 49.56%; hence,
access to legal aid in this regard can be considered

balanced. Males predominantly accessed criminal law,
accounting for 78.59% of the recipients, and females for
21.41%; this may correspond to their higher
involvement in such cases. The females were
predominant among family law legal aid recipients,

The American Journal of Political Science Law and Criminology

14

https://www.theamericanjournals.com/index.php/tajpslc

The American Journal of Political Science Law and Criminology

comprising 60.85%, with males accounting for 39.15%
(Figure 3). This research aligns with the nature of family

disputes, where the female is typically either the
plaintiff or the primary party involved in the dispute
[11].

Fig. 3. Distribution of legal aid recipients by category of law and gender (compiled by author based on [11])

Legal aid partnerships are beneficial to citizens, although
they have some accompanying disadvantages. The
major advantage is increasing access to legal services for
different strata of society, especially vulnerable groups.
For instance, this initiative has saved thousands of New
Yorkers from eviction, enabling them to stay in their
homes during the economic turmoil caused by COVID-19
[12]. However, this drawback limits its effectiveness.
Regulatory barriers against lobbying and class actions
hinder systemic reform, depriving organizations willing
to accept such funding of resources. The high demand
for services remains unmet, with 120 million legal
problems occurring each year, underscoring the
magnitude of the issue [13]. Pro bono work can be
uneven in quality; if such work is viewed as an
opportunity for professional development rather than a
means to secure justice, expertise will be lacking.
Geographic barriers, more pronounced in rural areas,
further limit service access and create inequities in the
distribution of legal aid. These factors have also
highlighted the need for further reforms to eliminate
systemic barriers and enhance interaction effectiveness.
Human rights organizations, though involved in human
rights work, advocacy, education, and monitoring
through legal activities, are primarily engaged in
litigation. These organizations submit complaints and

appeals not only to national courts but also to
international fora for protecting citizen rights. These
organizations protect the right to freedom, the right to
a fair trial, and other fundamental rights. Advocacy, as
one form of activity, serves the purpose of soliciting
legal changes and developing legislation that can
thereby improve living conditions for specific categories
of citizens. Human rights organizations are also engaged
in legal education, informing the public about their
rights and the available avenues for protection. An
important element of the work of these organizations is
monitoring the legal situation in the country, which
enables them to identify human rights violations in a
timely manner and submit appropriate appeals to
government agencies or international human rights
structures.

The mechanisms and programs of human rights
organizations are guided by the principles of legal aid for
citizens facing rights violations. These may include free
legal consultations, organizing defenses in court,
assistance in preparing legal documents, and
information campaigns on human rights protection.
Other related activities include setting up hotlines and
consultation centers for helping victims of violence,
discrimination, or other forms of legal violations. The
programs offered by human rights organizations assist

The American Journal of Political Science Law and Criminology

15

https://www.theamericanjournals.com/index.php/tajpslc

The American Journal of Political Science Law and Criminology

individual cases, but they also strive for broader changes
within the legal system that will benefit refugees,
migrants, and other priority groups. Such organizations
also provide important services in helping to change
existing

legislation

through

cooperation

with

government agencies and international human rights
structures. Several criteria determine the effectiveness
evaluation of a human rights organization in providing
legal assistance. These include the availability and
quality of services, results of impacts on legislative
changes, and raised levels of legal literacy among
citizens. Other aspects are the effectiveness of human
rights NGOs based on outcomes resulting from their
intervention in specific cases, as well as the number of
completed positive court cases. However, there is a
degree to which citizens trust these human rights
organizations to effectively protect the population's
interests. According to research, countries with active
human rights organizations have high legal awareness
among their citizens, which in turn ensures better access
to justice for the protection of citizens' rights. Their
effectiveness varies, however, with the country's
political circumstances and the degree of cooperation
they offer to state agencies. In some instances, political
or legal impediments may restrict the actions of human
rights organizations in advocating for citizens' rights.
Even under conditions where access to justice is severely
limited, the human rights organization continues to
assume an indispensable role in providing legal
protection to the at-risk segments of the population.
They thus form a significant part of the legal aid system,
through which human rights organizations provide
citizens with access to rights and protection via their
various activities, mechanisms, and programs. An
assessment of their effectiveness will not only highlight
the successes and achievements they have recorded but
also identify possible measures through which
improvement in the area of human rights protection can
be achieved.

CONCLUSION

The partnership between the government and civil
society in legal aid provides access to justice primarily for
the vulnerable social groups. This study demonstrates
that the legal aid provided by the government and civil
society complements each other due to their differences
in funding and organizational structures. While the

government provides basic support through its legally
regulated systems, Civil Society Organizations (CSOs)
protect marginalized groups, and legislative reforms
bring legal education.

But the effectiveness of this collaboration is limited by
many barriers. Inadequacies, like a lack of enough
money and bureaucracy, lower the level of services
available. Social biases, such as gender biases, increase
the disparities. There are also institutional issues, such
as services being geographically inaccessible in rural
regions, that limit access to legal aid.

The fruits of collaboration are evident in one of the
successful initiatives, the Right to Counsel program in
New York City, which successfully prevented mass
evictions during the pandemic. However, reforms are
necessary due to systemic shortcomings resulting from
lobbying bans and a lack of pro bono expertise. A
distribution analysis of legal aid by law category reveals
a vulnerable group that requires focused attention. To
make interaction more effective, it is imperative to:
raise funding for government programs, remove
regulatory restrictions on public organizations, and
introduce quality control mechanisms for services.
Increasing legal education and digitalizing the services
can help break geographic barriers. Future studies
should focus on developing resource-saving models,
examining the influence of advocacy on changing laws,
and investigating the long-term impacts of human rights
projects. Strengthening the connection between the
government and the public remains a key requirement
for establishing a just and inclusive legal system.