The move of the Bar Council of India (BCI) to weed out fake and non-practising lawyers by implementing the Certificate and Place of Practice (Verification) Rules has drawn bouquets as well as brickbats from various quarters of the legal fraternity.
While BCI Chairman Manan Kumar Mishra said the main purpose is to remove fake advocates from the legal profession, West Bengal Bar Council member and senior advocate Kamal Bandopadhyay criticised the move and termed the new rule as "impractical and unscientific".
The BCI has implemented the Certificate and Place of Practice (Verification) Rules, 2015, to check the genuineness of their enrollment details by verifying their educational certificates and place of practice.
Bandopadhyay said it is "impractical" to verify lawyers affidavits, stating the place of practice and scrutinise the certificates.
"The swearing of an affidavit cannot help searching the fake advocates. It can be filed by any practicing or non-practicing advocate or even fake ones. How will the BCI verify the affidavits? It's not scientific," he said.
Bandopadhyay said the new rule was impractical and it was not possible for the advocates to file for 'renewal' after every five years.
There are many advocates from interior parts of the state without sufficient income who would not be able to pay the fees and obtain the certificate of practice, he said.
Standing in favour of the Rules, Mishra said the apex lawyers' body has implemented the Rules under which all advocates except senior counsel and Supreme Court advocates- on-record, had to apply within six months of January 13, 2015, before receiving their 'certificates of practice', which will be obligatory for practice.
"The purpose is to verify certificates and genuineness of
the enrollment certificates given by advocates. Most of the certificates are forged. It is to weed out fake advocates. Certain State bar councils does not even have the list of the lawyers who died after enrolling. It is to know where one is practicing," Mishra said.
His views were also supported by advocate Joice George, a Parliamentarian and a member of the Parliamentary standing committee for Law and Justice, who said that any malpractices within this profession must be curtailed and for this, the new set of Rules will help.
"If its the matter of sustenance for the advocates, BCI can bring up a system to support those advocates rather than letting them indulge in any other profession," he added while urging the apex law body to initiate a support system for the junior lawyers for at least three-four years during the initial period of their career.
Mishra added that large number of lawyers get enrolled with state bar councils and then they shift to other business or private jobs, they would not inform the association and even the Advocacy Act does not allow any advocate to do any other job, if he is practicing.
Delhi Bar Council of Chairman and senior advocate K K Manan was of the opinion that non-practicing lawyers must explore options such as legal assistants, law officers and many other services available.
"Those who are not practicing must declare it and inform the Bar Council. They can either practice as a lawyer or pursue other jobs. They should either go for practice or surrender their enrollment," Manan said.
The BCI got the nod from the Supreme Court, which overruled the Kerala and Karnataka High Courts' stay on implementation of these rules on October 2, 2015.
Supporting the new Rules, Chairman of Bar Council of Kerala, advocate Joseph John said, "If lawyers get into other professions, the reasonable restriction will come into effect and bar council have the right to restrict the practice."
He said the state Bar Councils had issued guidelines to segregate practicing lawyers from non-practicing ones.
