[Media reports] Things can be taken out of context; every day I check to see what I have said: Madras High Court Chief Justice Sanjib Banerjee

The hearing in a case concerning the validity of certain legal education courses offered by the Annamalai University took an interesting turn on Friday when a counsel appearing before the Court recalled the circulation of a Bar & Bench news article on an earlier hearing in the matter..In the said hearing, the Court had orally urged the Bar Council of India (BCI) to take a more serious view of issues touching upon the quality of law graduates and legal education. .Among other observations, the Court had orally remarked, at the time,"For the sake of the dignity of what you and I wear, I think you (BCI) should look into it more seriously, not as a professional matter, and try to deal with the malaise...(There is) a lot of hesitation. It is no longer respectful to introduce yourself as a lawyer or judge anymore.".[Declining standards of legal education] No longer respectful to introduce self as lawyer or judge: Madras High Court.Appearing before the Bench of Chief Justice Sanjib Banerjee and Justice Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy, the BCI's counsel today recalled that the news had been circulated as if "it was the stand of the Court." .He went on to point out that the case is not adversarial and that remarks may be exchanged between the Bench and the Bar as part of a healthy discussion. .Chief Justice Banerjee, in response, observed that oral comments may be taken out of context in media reports. "We are in a situation where everyone wants to attract attention. They want to sensationalise, that is what will sell. Every day I check to see what I have said now," he added.."I know what I have said before I step out", the BCI counsel remarked, adding, "It is not an adversarial litigation that I am trying to create.".The case concerns the award of the LLB (General) and LLB (Academic) courses by the Director, Directorate of Distance Education, Annamalai University. The petitioner challenged the same as not being authorised by the BCI. The Court had earlier recorded the BCI's submission that it has not recognised the said course and that without recognition, no legal education course can be imparted nor any legal degree awarded entitling the degree-holder to practice in India..In April this year, the Court recorded the Annamalai University's submission that it has the right to impart distance education purely for educational purposes and not for purpose of entitlement to enrol as a lawyer..During the hearing today, the Court noted that in the US, persons who pursue such courses may be employed as paralegals. However, to practice law, the Bar Exam would still have to be cleared, the Bench observed..The courtroom discussion during the hearing today also went into issues touching upon persons who misrepresent themselves as lawyers. .The BCI's counsel noted that in several cases, people had presented themselves as lawyers and approached the Court, only for the BCI to find out later that no such lawyer has been registered with any of the State Bar Councils..The submission led Chief Justice Banerjee to remark."In Calcutta (near the Calcutta High Court), probably not in walking distance ... there is a shop called Gajkumar with jackets and gowns being sold ... All you need to do is invest 900 rupees and wear a band and you get access anywhere.".He went on to recount that before the COVID pandemic struck, there were efforts being taken to regulate the entry of persons to Court, especially after certain bombings took place in Delhi. However, when it came to entry passes, there was fierce opposition from the Bar, Chief Justice Banerjee recalled.."The problem is, who will regulate you?", the Chief Justice observed, adding that the regulation of Bar Councils is a serious issue. .The BCI counsel noted, in turn, that there is already a petition pending before the High Court which challenges Section 9 of the Advocates' Act, 1961, which empowers 'Disciplinary Committees' constituted by the BCI and State Bar Councils to examine complaints of misconduct against advocates..Madras High Court issues notice to BCI, TN Bar Council, Central government on plea challenging Section 9 of Advocates Act.Referring to this issue,the BCI counsel added that the Supreme Court, by a seven-Judge Bench ruling, has already held that the independence of the judiciary rests with the independence of Bar..In response, Chief Justice Banerjee remarked, "Unfortunately, it has become so politicised ... Previously, you would have unquestioned leaders for the Bar. ... (When it comes to) office bearers of bar bodies, those who have practice, reputation, those who command respect - they don't want to offer themselves for reasons not difficult to understand,. Those elected - without meaning disrespect and there are many exceptions - but frankly speaking, how many of the elected Bar Council members do you see arguing in Court?".The BCI counsel noted that some introspection may be required. He went on to caution that the remarks made in Court the last time were circulated in the news as if it were the stand of the Court..The hearing in the matter will continue next Wednesday at 2.15 pm..On a related note, oral observations made in the Madras High Court had become a matter of some debate earlier this year after such observations criticizing the Election Commission of India (ECI) of India were widely reported in the media. .On April 26, the High Court had orally remarked that the ECI is singularly responsible for the COVID-19 situation in India today and that it should probably be put on murder charges for failing to ensure compliance of COVID-19 protocol during election rallies..The ECI approached the High Court, in turn, urging for directions to be issued to media houses to confine their reports to observations recorded in orders or judgments and to refrain from reporting on oral observations made during court proceedings in the case. However, the High Court declined to entertain the plea, prompting the ECI to appeal before the Supreme Court..Madras High Court says Election Commission's concerns on "murder charge" comment, media sensationalism can wait; focus now is on COVID measures.The Supreme Court, however, dismissed the ECI's plea, while also observing that Constitutional bodies should do better than complain about the reporting of court proceedings. On the freedom of the media to report court proceedings, the apex court held,."Open access to court is the cornerstone of constitutional freedom. Article 19(1)(a) covers freedom of press. Freedom of speech and expression covers freedom to cover court proceedings too."