Individuals and companies subject to legal proceedings have the right to TWO PROBLEMS. The first, caused by the research itself The courts must decide whether there is sufficient evidence to convict them and determine what the penalty should be, which represents a clear threat to those under suspicion. The courts must decide whether there is sufficient evidence to convict them and determine what the sentence should be, which represents a clear threat to those under suspicion.
The second, which sometimes runs on a parallel plane, that of public opinion. It judges mercilessly and condemns at almost the same time persons or entities involved in legal cases long before the courts have even ruled.
To face the first setback, the subjects involved in a judicial investigation should hire a specialist, a lawyer who is an expert in such matters. The lawyer will put his knowledge, experience and expertise at the disposal of his client to fight for his innocence in the framework of the case, before the appropriate court.
In order to address the second concern, however, persons or companies subject to judicial proceedings very rarely see a specialist., someone who knows how to fight against the so-called TV news penalty. There is no culture or tradition of this in Spain. On the contrary, there is a general belief that justice will sort everything out. There is a puerile confidence that things will be put right in the eyes of public opinion when the judicial truth finally emerges. I have known few such profound errors of approach.
Firstly, because such a court decision may not be satisfactory. Sometimes, the final outcome does not depend on the good work of the best lawyers. The outcome is also in the hands of the administrative authorities (Tax Agency, State Attorney's Office, National Police or Civil Guard), the public prosecutor, the judge and, ultimately, the judges who make up the magistrates. The outcome is also in the hands of the administrative authorities (Tax Agency, State Attorney's Office, National Police or Civil Guard), the public prosecutor's office, the judge and, ultimately, the magistrates who make up the high courts of first instance. Entrusting an external element such as the judgement of public opinion to the outcome of a case in which so many people can intervene does not seem the wisest thing to do.
Secondly, because the damage that can be caused by a parallel trial is sometimes far greater than that of a criminal conviction. There has been no shortage of reputational damage caused by a seemingly minor court case. Some companies have seen their profit and loss accounts reduced by many zeros and have had to lay off thousands of employees due to the consequences on their image caused by a legal proceeding that called into question their actions in the context of a one-off issue with hardly any monetary implications. Even if years later the justice system ended up recognising their innocence, the long journey through the labyrinth of suspicion has had devastating effects on their business model, however consolidated it may have been. In a short time, customers lose trust, brand image sinks and even suppliers tend to disassociate themselves from the company..
A specialist in litigation communication is therefore as necessary, if not more so, than hiring the best lawyer.. A company's or a person's reputation runs outside the judicial process, on another stage, even if it is the courts that have lit the fuse. And in the realm of public opinion, the rules are not the same as in the courtroom. The stage, for a start, has no physical doors or boundaries. Nor normative ones. The court is not made up of one or a few people, but of thousands or even millions, who, moreover, have no studies on the subject, but only their ability to prejudge and bounce opinions that are poorly substantiated or supported by non-technical arguments, based on supposed authorities or influencers. Perception, therefore, takes precedence over truth, which is already extremely complex.
The specialist responsible for looking after the prestige of a person or entity involved in legal disputes must know the timing of criminal, civil or contentious proceedings; be able to identify the aspects that could most damage the client's image; have the ability to detect the strong points that should also shape the public perception; have experience in handling court cases; have a wide network of contacts among the most prestigious media; and have the ability to anticipate the different scenarios that may arise.
Only with these skills can someone help to shape the public image of a person or company involved in legal problems, a process that takes place outside the judicial process but is anchored to it and in which truth plays a decisive role. No building can be constructed without real foundations, not even the foundation of appearance itself.
Our director of the Litigation UnitRoberto Ruiz Ballesteros, has published this text in the digital media Dircomfidencial. Access here