India’s coronavirus lockdown is revealing deep income disparities in the legal profession.
As the CoronaVirus or Covid19 spreads its tentacles in the society and the nation, a class of people who have been hit very hard, rarely find a mention in the mainstream media.
This class of people belongs to the Noble Profession of Lawyering, and are referred to as "Lawyers" or "Advocates". Over 79% of lawyers with less than two years of experience earn less than ₹10,000 a month, according to a survey by think tank Vidhi Centre for Legal Policy.
They are prohibited from seeking their livelihood, from all other means and occupations, except the Legal Profession (Lawyer-ing). They are prohibited from advertising about themselves, their skills, and their law practice in general.
This law, in the form of a binding directive, under Rule 36, Section IV,Part VI of the Bar Council of India Rules prohibits lawyers from ‘the soliciting of work or advertising, either directly or indirectly, whether by circulars, advertisements, touts, personal communications, interviews not warranted by personal relations, furnishing inspiring newspaper comments or producing his photographs to be published in connection with cases in which he has been engaged or concerned’. It is important to note that BCI is the designated authority under Advocates Act, 1961 with the power to make delegated legislations (subsidiary legislations intended to implement the parent law, which, in this case is the Advocates Act, 1961). The proponents of this blanket ban mostly find themselves justifying this oddity under the garb of public policy, public utility, social justice and nobility of the profession along with the belief that the legal ‘industry’ will become fiercely competitive and money-oriented if advocates are allowed to advertise and solicit work. That being said, due credit should be bestowed upon the Indian justice system for acknowledging the nobility aspect of the legal profession. Even the Supreme Court has, time and again, sanctified the yardsticks of nobility and integrity as the pillars of the profession. (Source)
In a historic move, an entire bench of the Supreme Court of India conducted its first ever paperless hearing on June 1, 2020. It was a rare sight as three judges sat in a virtual court, with laptops instead of bulky case files. Lawyers were seen giving presentations via video link, with the judges typing notes. However, with this new push toward virtual courts, there are also several structural challenges that have come to the fore. Many judges and lawyers feel that these need to be addressed as Indian courts traverse into the digital world.As per the common law principles, the legal system is expected to adapt to the changing needs of society. Thus, in 2008, on the petitioning of this very matter by an advocate, the Supreme Court, in V.B. Joshi v Union of India, relaxed the absolute prohibition on legal advertising.
However, the Supreme Court was rather hesitant in revoking the prohibition (as was petitioned in the case) and instead diluted the provision to the allow the display of the following information on online and offline platforms:
(1) name of the lawyer; and (2) address, telephone numbers and email id; and (3) (a) enrollment number, (b) date of enrollment, (c) name of State Bar Council where originally enrolled, (d) name of the State Bar Council on whose roll name stands currently and (e) name of the Bar Association of which the advocate is a member; and (4) professional qualifications and academic qualifications; and (5) areas of practice.
Although the VB Joshi Case did relax the norms of legal advertising, it was too late and too little. In fact, Allahabad High Court’s Lucknow bench has recently issued a contempt order on online portals like Justdial, Myadvo, Lawrato, Legalserviceindia among others which supposedly carry out advertising in the name of ‘enlisting’ in light of strict instructions from the high court to refrain from such activities.
While the law fraternity had been hoping for a progressive easing of the restrictions, the contrasting opinion pronounced by the court has created a sense of dismay and shock in the legal society.
On comparing ourselves with the other common law pioneers, we find that although the US and the UK did have an absolute prohibition on legal advertising till 1977 and 1990 respectively, both the countries revamped their internal regulations to adapt to the changing norms of globalisation and liberalisation. (source)
On the other hand, several lawyers' bodies have written to the Chief Justice of India, calling for a return to physical courts. The Bar Council of India claims that 90% of lawyers and judges across the country are "unaware about the technology." Some lawyers are concerned about their livelihoods, claiming that virtual courts are currently accessible only to a few. (source)
The vast majority of lawyers depend on fresh filings and hearings for their income. With only urgent matters listed, lawyers are finding it tough.
Mention lawyers and the image that strikes the public is that of famous names who move around in Audis and BMWs and charge massive amounts of money. But this section is a small fraction. The vast majority of lawyers, especially in the lower courts, function on a case-to-case basis for their income. And when the courts do not function, their economic situation becomes precarious. (source)Patna civil court lawyer Abhishek said at least 95% lawyers at civil court are under financial stress. “Some of them can’t even meet their daily needs. They are part of justice delivery system. The high court should direct the state government to take steps to help these lawyers,” he said. The hearing at civil courts got crippled due to Covid-19 which directly affected practising lawyers. (source)
Last month, one Adv. K. Uthamakumaram found himself in the headlines last month when it was reported that the out-of-work Chennai lawyer was forced to weave baskets for a living. Earlier this month, Adv. Sapan Kumar Pal sold vegetables outside the Orissa High Court as a mark of protest after the state bar council allegedly delayed the release of promised financial assistance to lockdown-hit advocates. (source)
Lawyers turn vegetable vendors, delivery boys to make up for lost income. As Aditya Kashyap sits by his vegetable cart in a bylane of Vasai, Mumbai, he tries not to think about five months ago when he was busy filing bail pleas in Magistrate Courts. (source)
Posted on 10th July 2020 is this Paper - COVID-19 Epidemic: Indian Lawyers in Financial Crisis, Ignored, Depressed: In pursuit of Financial And Moral Support, by Chitranjali Negi Advocate Supreme Court of India, in which she says:
An advocate's duty is as important as that of a Judge. Advocates have a large responsibility towards the society. India ranks 68 out of 126 countries, down 3 places from last year in 2019 in “Rule of Law Index” which measures how the rule of law is experienced and perceived by the general public. The Indian Law profession is one of the largest in the world, with more than 2 million enrolled advocates Nationwide. The Nationwide lock down has brought to the fore the great disparity in the legal profession & lock down has financially damages lawyers. Lawyers in India are the most neglected and overlooked during COVID19 comparative of other professional. 70% Lawyers are almost daily wage workers who earn per appearance hearing. COVID-19 has impacted deep and triggered many social, mental and psychological issues as well.
The fundamental principle which determines the privileges and responsibilities of lawyer in relation to the court is that he is an officer to justice and a friend of the court. Lawyers status as an officer of justice does not mean he is subordinate to the judge. It only means that he is an integral part of the machinery for the administration of justice. (source)
In response to the current pandemic, which has already stirred havoc into the lives of advocates, various State Bar Councils (SBC) have initiated COVID-19 relief grant schemes on a first-come application basis, the grant criterion of which varies for each state institution. Some SBCs like Karnataka has released the list of beneficiaries but without the details of the relief amount granted, while others such as Rajsthan and Delhi have closed their application window without any intimation on future courses of action on the website.
Unless a person is tangibly benefitting from such schemes, there is really no direct way of knowing the procedure and result, as is. The inherent lack of transparency and absence of uniformity in the regulatory mechanism for advocates; and second, that the act of granting a measly Rs 5,000 to select advocates (the criterion and determination of which is also unknown) in hopes that this might help those individuals sail through a pandemic that has already put their lives at a standstill for over three months now. (Source)
Though the Central Government has announced that lawyers will come in the ambit of MSME loans, its is highly doubtful, if the Bankers recognise that lawyers are eligible for availing loans from Banks.
By the time the pandemic is over (??) most of the lawyers will be rendered indigent, and there will be no "nobility" left in the "Noble Profession", except for the top 10% creamy layer of lawyers.
