Kerala Bar Council polls see steady turnout amid concerns of high nomination fee, long queues in summer heat

The Kerala Bar Council Elections held on April 17 witnessed a steady voter turnout. However, candidates flagged logistical shortcomings in the way the elections were conducted and the limited participation of lawyers as candidates due to the high nomination fee of ₹1.25 lakh.

The elections, conducted across 84 polling centres, saw participation from a voter base of over 34,000 advocates.

The polls were held for 23 out of 25 seats in the Kerala Bar Council with a mandatory 30 per cent quota for women, following interim directions issued by the Supreme Court of India.

Pursuant to the Supreme Court's order in M Vardhan v Union of India & Anr. the elections were being supervised by a High-Powered Election Committee to ensure fairness in the process.

Retired Justice VG Arun of the Kerala High Court was appointed as the returning officer to oversee the election process. The last Kerala Bar Council elections were held in 2018.

Polling, which started at 10 am, saw an early rush at several centres.

Advocate Manoj Kumar N, a Bar Council member who is standing again for the elections, said that while there was a large turnout by around 9:20 AM, many voters initially left due to inadequate facilities before returning later to cast their votes.

"Turnout for this year has been very good. In fact by 9:20 AM, a large turnout had come. But since the facilities arranged were not good, many went back. Thereafter, they came back again," he said.

Several candidates said that the poor management of the poll process, including the lack of proper infrastructure, inconvenienced voters and led to long queues amid the summer heat.

Advocate Nagaraj Narayanan, director of the Kerala Law Academy, termed the process as "most disorganised."

"The most important thing I want to say about today's election is, it is most disorganised and the most atrocious way the election is being conducted, because it is not arranged at all. In the morning, there was a lot of agitation, a lot of people faced trouble, queues extended to nearly 100 metres and beyond the compound and even beyond the road. It was very bad and no proper arrangements," he said.

Advocate Yeshwanth Shenoy, former President of the Kerala High Court Advocates' Associations (KHCAA) and a candidate in the current council elections echoed these concerns. A significant number of voters left without casting their votes due to delays in the election process and the heat, he said.

He also criticised the lack of technological upgrades in the election process.

"We are speaking about AI, and we are still using manual verification. At least a substantial number of computers could have been used to speed up the verification process," he pointed out.

Shenoy was particularly critical of the outgoing Bar Council as well, alleging that it failed to contribute anything meaningful for lawyers. His immediate priority, if elected, would be to ensure transparency and accountability in the functioning of the Council, he said.

Voter turnout estimates varied. Some said polling crossed 50 per cent by noon and could reach around 70 per cent by 5 PM. However, others felt that the timing of the election amidst the court vacation and Vishu holidays affected polling numbers as lawyers from different parts of Kerala would have to travel long distances to cast their votes and may not even turn up for voting.

Candidates also criticised the steep non-refundable nomination fee of  ₹1.25 lakh, terming it an 'exorbitant' amount which made it difficult for ordinary lawyers to contest the elections.

Advocate Anil S Raj, who has earlier served as the President of the Ernakulam Bar Association, opined that such a fee was unfair and exclusionary. Such a system risks limiting participation in the elections to a creamy layer of candidates, he pointed out.

"Even in Lok Sabha elections, the deposit is only ₹25,000, and in Assembly Elections it is ₹10,000. Here it is ₹1.25 lakh and non-refundable, I don’t think that is right," he said.

Concerns were also raised about the lack of sufficient representation from young lawyers in the elections. Nearly all candidates have over 10 years of practice, and only one candidate has less than a decade of practice at the Bar.

"Why are we speaking only about junior lawyers? Even lawyers with 25 years of experience cannot afford this (nomination fee). Election must provide a fair playing field, not just for those with money," Advocate Shenoy added.

Advocate Rajesh Vijayan, a Bar Council member who is contesting the elections this time round as well, pointed to a writ petition he filed before the Kerala High Court challenging the high nomination fee.

He noted that based on the Supreme Court's wisdom, the amount was retained. However, the high fee acted as a barrier for many advocates seeking to contest the elections, he said.

Advocate Vijayan also spoke about internal political dynamics that often limits the ability of Bar Council members to implement reforms.

"There is unnecessary politics here. What we can do is limited, as once you don't have the majority in the Bar Council, you cannot do anything. So politics is an issue. Even we (Bar Council members) faced it last 5 years or so, we face the same issue because politics is an issue.  So even if we have so many plans, we may not be able to execute them," he said.

Advocate Raj, however, also offered a nuanced take on this state of affairs. Law and politics are inherently linked and some level of political influence in such institutions was inevitable, he noted.

Women's representation also emerged as a significant theme. Many candidates welcomed the move to reserve seats for women.

Advocate Latha T Thankappan said that women's reservation was long overdue, while recounting that she had contested the elections in 2018 as well, when only men were elected. She said that the current framework would help amplify women voices within the Kerala Bar Council.

Advocate Thankappan also highlighted broader concerns affecting women lawyers, including inadequate financial support and societal limitations.

"When it comes to women, they are being limited in a lot of ways. The societal view is that women lawyers are good only for family matters or accident matters. We need to change that. That is our hope," she added.

Advocate Kabani Dinesh, another female candidate, described reservation as an opportunity for the greater participation of women candidates, especially first-generation lawyers like herself, on a Council that has long been dominated by men.

Advocate Sheela Devi added,

"Women are actually administrators, they know how to administer an institution more or a house or whatever it be. Therefore, I think, women will have a better hand in managing the affairs of the Bar Council."