HELENA ­ A legislator, who is a paralegal, said Friday he believes the Legislature and not the Supreme Court should make the rules governing court proceedings and the practice of law.

Sen. Jerry O'Neil, R-Kalispell, said current state laws, which require attorneys to have a degree from a university accredited by the American Bar Association, limit legal services offered in Montana.

As the law stands now, O'Neil said, "The lawyers have the handle on how they practice and how much service is provided to the public."

O'Neil sponsored Senate Bill 109 and testified in its support before the Senate Judiciary Committee. If the bill passes, Montana would become the first state to require the Legislature oversee court practices.

A member of the committee, Sen. Mike Halligan, D-Missoula, said he doesn't understand why a person who wants to act as a lawyer can't get a law degree. "How is regulating the law profession different from regulating doctors and CPAs?" Halligan asked.

The bill was opposed by the State Bar of Montana, the state attorney general's office, the American Civil Liberties Union of Montana and the AFL-CIO, among others.

Christal Ness said the three paralegal associations she represents try to distance themselves from paralegals who offer legal advice.

"Paralegals are not licensed to practice law," Ness said. She also said the bill would compromise and upset the balance of power in Montana's judicial system.

"The people of Montana would be ill-served by an amendment to the Constitution that transfers regulatory authority over the state bar to the Legislature," said Molly Shepherd, president of the State Bar of Montana.

Don Judge, executive director of the AFL-CIO, said the judicial branch, like the Legislature, is self-governing and should remain that way.

"You don't send your problems to the executive or judicial branch," he said to legislators.

O'Neil also argued that current laws fail to allow due process for attorneys represented under them and that disciplinary actions for lawyers are inconsistent.

Two proponents offered testimony in support of those points.

James Turner, executive director of the legal reform group HALT, said the legal regulators are the same people as the legal practitioners, thereby creating a conflict of interest that protects attorneys from competition and limits individual protection from lawyer misconduct.

"The Legislature needs to be involved as a checks and balance to the current system of self-regulated attorneys," Turner said. "We believe this bill can increase public confidence and accountability in the legal system."

Robert Emmons, a Great Falls attorney, also argued the Commission on Practice acts as both the jury determining guilt and as the punishing body. He said the practice is unfair to attorneys standing trial for misconduct.

"In 25 years, the Commission on Practice has never lost a case," Emmons said. "Nobody's that good."

However, Helena attorney John Sullivan argued the proponents can't argue al the same time that the judicial system is both too hard and too soft on lawyers.

"They both can't be right," Sullivan said.

Chris Tweeten, chief counsel for the state attorney general's office, said the Supreme Court is closest to the judicial system and best suited to regulate it.

Tweeten said complaints that currently are redressed immediately by the Supreme Court would be in limbo until the legislative session every two years. He said the Legislature also would be responsible for ruling on many orders the Supreme Court hears about modifying procedure.

"I don't think your workload is such that you want to take on that burden," he said.