Mooting in India – Time for a Change?

Mooting is one of the most competitive activities law students indulge in, with moot court competitions held throught the year. Yet, despite its growing popularity, mooting in India does suffer from some systemtic flaws. In this piece, mooter Apurva Vishwanath highlights some of these flaws and the way forwrd. .A few months ago, I was asked to write about my survival of law school. I tried to think of the things that kept me together and I couldn’t really think of anything in particular. On deeper introspection though, it does appear that the element that has kept me “together” in the last three years has been mooting. My experience of just three moots is reason enough to not have any advice that is not already known. However, I have learnt immensely from mooting and here are a few observations with those who may be interested..So, this read is for mooting enthusiasts- for that includes not just students but also those who organize them. Before I begin, here’s a disclaimer- my observations come from the two moots where my team did not cross the victory line (we were one short) and one in which we did. I risk this piece coming across as a sore loser’s rant but, well, so be it. .Mooting has a lot to do with things that have little relation with the participant’s knowledge of law – this is the single biggest lesson I’ve learnt. Mooting is so much about luck, is the first piece of advice every mooter should receive..In my third year, I formed a team to take part in a grand intra to bring some order into my lazy law school life. It worked. On the last day of my penultimate year in law school, my teammate and I sat on the curbside past midnight and decided to take part in Jessup. We called up probable teammates and repeatedly asked them if they wanted it as badly as we did..A short digression here. In the 18th Stetson qualifications, we lost in the quarterfinals, after finishing second in the prelims to the team that was ranked first in the prelims. And all this because the draw of lots was based on randomly picked chits. .Back to our Jessup journey. Now any mooter who has participated in the Jessup moot sincerely can tell you about the amount of effort it requires. Much to our dismay, we were forced to relive our Stetson experience where we fell just an inch short of the finishing line. Both times, teams were pitted against each other in no particular order and much depended on who your opponent was rather than what your capabilities are..I’ve heard stories of mooting disappointments- big and small. While issues like dismal participation and poor judging are some of the more common problems, ineffective planning of the moot is the real deal breaker. And this is what is particularly irksome. Many colleges and organisers do not involve the best practices when it comes to conducting a moot court competition..Is it too much for a mooter, who puts in so much effort, to ask that the element of luck be minimised by the organisers? I am sure that’s not a big ask..Here are some of the issues that have to be debated and, hopefully, be resolved..Insufficient preliminary rounds.For example the prestigious BCI Moot which has just one prelim round. Four problems and months of preparation and having just one prelim round to decide who makes it to the quarters. This when the average participation for BCI would be anywhere close to 40 teams. Similar experiences have been reported with All India Moot Court Competition for the Kerala Law Academy (KLA) and Annual IIPS IP Moot Court Competition conducted by Narsee Monjee..If a win-loss system is not employed in the prelim rounds, then the judges must probably be asked to mark in a pre decided bracket. Say, teams are marked on a scale that wouldn’t be greatly prejudicial to teams. In many cases, the winning team in one round ends up with lesser scores than the losing team in another courtroom. If the grading is so arbitrary, what sense does it make to take cumulative scores into account?.Memo marks.Another important issue is the marking of memorials. If memorial scores aren’t added in the prelims, then what good are they for? For as long as GLC hosted the prestigious Nani Palkhivala, the memorials were to be submitted only for the best memo prize. In all Surana moots, teams are allotted randomly in the preliminary rounds and in the quarterfinals..When memorials are marked, the best practice is to have power match ups. Some teams are pitted against all weak teams and go on to register massive wins. And there are always rounds in which both the teams are equally good but Instead of registering these massive wins lose with close margins against the other team. In most preliminary rounds since there are two judge benches (this is the case with Jessup and Stetson, for sure) the team that wins or loses, does so with much reluctance by the judges.. This leads to the elimination of the best participants from the competition..Last year, during the 18th Stetson Moot (South Rounds) I had personally taken it up with Mr. Pritam Surana and hoped things would change. This year, the same practice was followed in the Jessup Nationals organised by Surana in collaboration with Christ University. I cannot fail to omit any Surana moot in this category. None of the moots follow any of the best practices in spite of repeated complains. .Regional Qualifiers versus the real deal.Moots organised by firms on their whimsical terms should be censured more than colleges who follow similar practices. Moots such as Jessup and Stetson are a ticket to international participation. This year’s Jessup has been even worse with both the regional rounds being clubbed together. It is beyond reason to comprehend why the qualifying rounds of international moots should have different rules from the actual competition itself. .I want to bring up my own experience again because I can’t use a better example. A team that had the second best memo scores was ranked 5th overall after the four preliminary rounds. Of all the teams, there were 3 who registered 4 wins, and 6 teams with 3 wins and one loss. We were one of the six and obviously didn’t make it to the semi finals. But the team that registered 4 wins and went on to make it to Washington was at least two hundred points behind our team. I don’t mean to say that this could have changed everything but, ideally, teams should have been pitted against each other according to some criteria. .Mooting is perhaps the closest experience that a student can have to appearing in court but it is also the most hyped up activity in law school. While acknowledging the effort and struggle of mooters, I urge organisers to ensure that their aspirations are not diluted due to such malpractices. Bragging rights will have no meaning if discrepancies aren’t addressed. Some intra moots of colleges are organised far better than the biggest moots in the Indian mooting circuit. Perhaps, on the consensus of law students or student moot organisations, minimum standards of diligence and general rules can be agreed upon which moot organisers will be guided by in the future. .My last moot ended on a high note in spite of the concerns I mentioned above. And I hope the same for everyone! .Apurva Vishwanath is a final year student at Dr. Ram Manohar Lohia National Law University, Lucknow.