The reforms carried out in capitalist countries show basically homogeneous trends, since they all move from the assumption, derived from the liberal ideology, that de facto inequality of access to justice is principally due to the lack of adequaate legal assistance. Reforms thus aim at improving assistance systems and extending their benefits not only to the poor, but to the lower middle class, for whom the cost of legal assistance remains too high. Legal aid systems based on services rendered by private lawyers who are paid out of public funds are distinguished from systems based on the creation of public offices of counseling and advice which include part-time or full-time salaried staff attorneys. The first model is generally regarded as closer to the traditional values of the legal profession, and thus more individualistic, while the latter is more socially oriented and views the accessibility of justice as a social right. However, the establishment of public legal assistance offices does not always reflect an acknowledgement of the legal problems of the underprivileged; it may simply be preferred because of its lower cost. Attempts to reform the system in capitalist countries are criticized, in that such attempts have often reflected the interests of ruling classes and operate against the lower classes who have no control over the means of production. Social inequality should be eradicated through laws capable of drastically modifying existing social structures. In the socialist countries the problem of access is dealt with by public legal aid offices and by creating simple and informal proceedings, characterized by auxiliary powers of the judge, public prosecutor, and social organizations. In the developing countries, attempts made at restructuring the law have often resulted in a wider gap between justice and the people; the administration of justice should therefore follow the route of conciliatory procedure. Presented are 34 notes and references. (Author abstract modified)