The Delhi Bar Association has decided to go on strike against the amendments which are likely to be proposed by the Law Commission to the Advocates Act, 1961..Ironically, the proposed amendments seek to ban lawyers from going on strike and impose a fine on advocates for any misconduct. The stringent methods are being proposed by the Law Commission to curb the increasing number of “fake” advocates..As reported by Hindustan Times, the Law Commission, in its report (which is yet to be submitted) to the Law Ministry, has suggested that a disciplinary body be formed that includes government nominees and those from outside Bar Council of India to tackle misconduct of an advocate..The Law Commission has made the proposal pursuant to the judgment delivered by the Supreme Court in July last year in the case of Mahipal Singh Rana v. State of Uttar Pradesh..President of the Delhi Bar Association NC Gupta circulated messages yesterday stating that the Law Commission has no authority to recommend any changes to the Advocates Act. Gupta stated that this was a “complete surrender by the BCI before the judges by recommending suspension of those who participate in strikes”..Former President of the Delhi High Court Bar Association, Rajiv Khosla also opposed the proposal. Making an indirect, snide remark against the current Delhi High Court Bar Association, Khosla stated,.“BCI wants to confine the role of the Bar Associations to hosting parties and playing matches with the judges. [There is] no mechanism to deal with corruption, favouritism and rude behaviour of the judges.”.Uppal had earlier this month organized badminton and football tournaments for the Delhi High Court Bar Association members..The strike is set to take place at 12 pm on Thursday outside the BCI Office at Rouse Avenue, ITO, Delhi..Most interestingly, the BCI has also come out in strong opposition against the move. BCI Chairman, Manan Kumar Mishra took to Facebook to voice his opinion..Bar & Bench reached out to BCI Chairman. On the decision of the Bar Association to go on strike, Mishra said, .“I have called a meeting today to clarify to the members of various Bar Associations that no recommendations have been made by the BCI and the Law Commission is still in the process of finalizing its recommendations.” .He further said, .“If at all, at any time in the future, either the Government or the Law Commission takes such a step, then the BCI will oppose the same. No one can be stopped from going on protest but unjustified protests or strikes will not be allowed by BCI.” .Currently, the legal profession is regulated by the Bar Council of India and State Bar councils. The Supreme Court in its judgment in Mahipal Singh Rana had noted that the Bar Council of India and various State Bar Councils have been a failure in so far as regulating lawyers and maintaining the standards of profession are concerned. It had requested the Law Commission to go into all the relevant aspects related to the regulation of the legal profession..“There appears to be urgent need to review the provisions of the Advocates Act dealing with regulatory mechanism for the legal profession and other incidental issues, in consultation with all concerned..…we request the Law Commission of India to go into all relevant aspects relating to regulation of legal profession in consultation with all concerned at an early date.”.Pursuant to the judgment, the Law Commission had sought a response from all State Bar Councils and Bar Associations of Supreme Court and High Court regarding the regulation of the legal profession.
The Delhi Bar Association has decided to go on strike against the amendments which are likely to be proposed by the Law Commission to the Advocates Act, 1961..Ironically, the proposed amendments seek to ban lawyers from going on strike and impose a fine on advocates for any misconduct. The stringent methods are being proposed by the Law Commission to curb the increasing number of “fake” advocates..As reported by Hindustan Times, the Law Commission, in its report (which is yet to be submitted) to the Law Ministry, has suggested that a disciplinary body be formed that includes government nominees and those from outside Bar Council of India to tackle misconduct of an advocate..The Law Commission has made the proposal pursuant to the judgment delivered by the Supreme Court in July last year in the case of Mahipal Singh Rana v. State of Uttar Pradesh..President of the Delhi Bar Association NC Gupta circulated messages yesterday stating that the Law Commission has no authority to recommend any changes to the Advocates Act. Gupta stated that this was a “complete surrender by the BCI before the judges by recommending suspension of those who participate in strikes”..Former President of the Delhi High Court Bar Association, Rajiv Khosla also opposed the proposal. Making an indirect, snide remark against the current Delhi High Court Bar Association, Khosla stated,.“BCI wants to confine the role of the Bar Associations to hosting parties and playing matches with the judges. [There is] no mechanism to deal with corruption, favouritism and rude behaviour of the judges.”.Uppal had earlier this month organized badminton and football tournaments for the Delhi High Court Bar Association members..The strike is set to take place at 12 pm on Thursday outside the BCI Office at Rouse Avenue, ITO, Delhi..Most interestingly, the BCI has also come out in strong opposition against the move. BCI Chairman, Manan Kumar Mishra took to Facebook to voice his opinion..Bar & Bench reached out to BCI Chairman. On the decision of the Bar Association to go on strike, Mishra said, .“I have called a meeting today to clarify to the members of various Bar Associations that no recommendations have been made by the BCI and the Law Commission is still in the process of finalizing its recommendations.” .He further said, .“If at all, at any time in the future, either the Government or the Law Commission takes such a step, then the BCI will oppose the same. No one can be stopped from going on protest but unjustified protests or strikes will not be allowed by BCI.” .Currently, the legal profession is regulated by the Bar Council of India and State Bar councils. The Supreme Court in its judgment in Mahipal Singh Rana had noted that the Bar Council of India and various State Bar Councils have been a failure in so far as regulating lawyers and maintaining the standards of profession are concerned. It had requested the Law Commission to go into all the relevant aspects related to the regulation of the legal profession..“There appears to be urgent need to review the provisions of the Advocates Act dealing with regulatory mechanism for the legal profession and other incidental issues, in consultation with all concerned..…we request the Law Commission of India to go into all relevant aspects relating to regulation of legal profession in consultation with all concerned at an early date.”.Pursuant to the judgment, the Law Commission had sought a response from all State Bar Councils and Bar Associations of Supreme Court and High Court regarding the regulation of the legal profession.
