Aditya Swarup
Aditya Swarup
|
If law schools are brought into existence to serve a social purpose and create ‘socially conscious’ individuals as they claim to do so, then the prevailing structure of law schools in India is flawed. In this article, I would like to further elucidate this argument in a detailed, factual analysis. While the idea has always been on my mind, I mustered up the courage to write this piece after reading David Segal’s article in the New York Times.
Reading law school recruitment statistics is like finding Neverland. You never really know the truth, till you’ve read it. Each institution considers it its claim to fame to have ‘X’ number of people joining law firms with a salaries ranging from Rs. 8,00,000 to 25,00,000 (Rs. 8-25 lakhs) p.a. There are few who join foreign universities to pursue higher studies. The remainder of the students, those joining the bar or pursuing social careers (NGOs etc.) form part of a group characterized by the irony they represent. On one hand law schools propagate their commitment to society and Convocation dignitaries urge students to join the bar and stress on the ‘social commitment’ of lawyers, while on the other hand these students don’t form a part of the law schools achievements or even get their picture in the prospectus for the courageous step they’ve taken.
At the same time, one probably needs to take a closer look at the demographics of the students entering National Law Universities the kinds of students and the various economic classes of the society to which they belong. While I shall argue it further, I assert that national law schools are generally catering to the needs of the upper middle class society thus alienating themselves from a vast majority of the Indian population that wish to receive quality Indian education.
Central to answering both these arguments is the existing fee structure of national law schools. Below is table of the ten best legal institutions in the country according to India Today and their fee structure:
Res Ipsa Loquitor ?
And might I add that this fee structure has not been stagnant over the years but has witnessed a steady increase. When I joined NALSAR University of Law, Hyderabad in 2005, a final year student used to pay a fee of about Rs. 35,000 per annum. I, on the other hand used to pay about Rs.70,000 per year. In five years time, I had never imagined that the fees would jump more than twofold for students joining National Law Universities. Including the cost of living and the money spent to pursue internships, we are talking about nearly Rs. 2,20,000 a year.
The economic impacts of such fees on the present Indian society are huge. We can altogether leave out the lower classes of society earning about a maximum of Rs. 3,00,000 (Rs. 3 lakh) a year in having access to such institutions. There is hardly any concession for backward classes in terms of fees with it being a meager Rs. 3,000-Rs. 4,000 less than that of a normal student. Thus, inevitably, 60% of the Indian population is excluded.
As regards the middle class, i.e. families earning about a maximum of Rs. 9,00,000 (Rs. 9 lakh) a year, another peculiar problem surfaces. Unless they have previous investments to cater for this need, such families would have to take loans which over a five year period would amount to about Rs. 11,00,000 (Rs. 11 lakh). For a family earning about Rs. 50,000 a month after tax deductions and already perhaps having housing loans, vehicle loans and the like, this is a huge financial strain. It then seems that it is only the upper middle class and upper class sections of the society that have comfortable access to a good legal education.
One can argue that this is perhaps the price that one has to pay for a good legal education, but surely this argument cannot stand as in the case of the various IITs where the fee is only about Rs. 20,000 per semester. About a decade ago, the Supreme Court stated that education in this country still ought to serve a socialist purpose and not be regarded as a profit making industry. The present structure of National Law Universities defy both these ideas. On one hand one rants about foreign education or private universities in India charging about Rs. 6,00,000 a year and on the other hand one fails to notice that Government institutions themselves are defying constitutional ideals and depriving a vast majority of the Indian population to quality legal education.
A student from a disadvantaged section of the society then surely doesn’t stand a chance in this system. Nevertheless, to ‘show’ that we are a socially advancing nation, we reserve a few places for them and talk of their inclusion. And ofcourse the inclusion of the socially backward is not economic based, but socially based. All that we heard about the creamy layer is a farce. For all purposes, the heir to a multi-crore industry can still have a place reserved for him if he qualifies under the SC/ST tag. With such a student having to pay only about Rs. 3000 less than a general student (being about Rs. 1,70,000), one can forget social advancement. All the ranting about providing for free and wholesome education to uplift the masses is actually eyewash.
In another dimension, the impact of the fee structures on the recruitments is quite monumental. One would always like lawyers from National Law Universities to participate in social causes, enter the Bar or explore other options with their career. Needless to say, a law degree, unlike a science or engineering degree, opens up a plethora of career options for individuals. However, the fact that one’s family has spent about Rs. 11 lakh already in his or her education in a way forces the student to look towards job opportunities that pay good money at the entry level. If there is a loan for the education, the burden is even higher. And with such a financial strain, it is quite impossible for one to continue living on their family’s income for a further couple of years if they wish to join an NGO or the Bar. Such avenues then, are still left open for students graduating from Government legal institutions.
Around the world, quality education manifests itself in two main ways. One is the American way, charging huge amount of fees from the students who are left paying up the education loans for the next ten years of their career. Another, a rather socialist model, where the fees is low, (or even free) so as to enable access to quality education to all sections of the society and the Government financing such institutions. The latter model is prevalent in Europe and till a few years ago, was thought to prevail in India. In a society which still has 30% of the population living below the poverty line, it is the latter model that must continue to be implemented.
Short terms solutions to the problem are initiatives that reach out to the poor sections of the society and pay for their training and education. One of which I can think of is Prof. Shamnad Basheer’s Increasing Diversity by Increasing Access to Legal Education (IDIA) project. On the other hand, if the Government subsidises the education, things will be a lot simpler. It’s been a while since I’ve been hearing Law Minister Veerappa Moily making promises to grant Rs. 100 crore to National Law Universities in the country and I’m just waiting to see his promise being implemented.
At the end of the day let’s not fool the world, but call a spade a spade. While National Law Universities claim to be creating a social revolution, none can and are being created. It leaves a bitter, but real taste in ones mouth. The irony of a law school.
Aditya Swarup is currently pursuing his Bachelors in Civil Law at the University of Oxford.
PS:
“This article is not meant to be a criticism about the career options of students graduating from national law schools. Neither am I stating that one career option is better than the other. What I am suggesting however is that the current fee structure removes that essential element of choice from a law student in deciding his career option. Each student should always be to choose his future and everyone must respect that.
On a broader perspective, the thrust of this article is not about law students and their careers, recruitments etc.. It is more to do with law school structures and policies. Students are not in the firing line. It is that the current fee structures make law schools alienate themselves from a large section of the Indian society which is not desirable in an Indian social setup.”
|
- 1. "This article is such hogwash. I'm sick and tired of these articles going off on a rant about how law schoolites aren't doing enough for a 'social revolution' in the country. There are more than enough examples of graduates of these National Law Universities setting out to do exceptional things. 1.The Naz Foundation case on S. 377 was largely a result of such graduates. 2.There is another case of a graduate of NLSIU successfully defending SIMI. 3. The present Salwa Judum case in the Supreme Court is being argued by Ashok Desai who in turn is briefed by graduates of the NLSIU. 4. Then there are the countless graduates of the National Law Universities who have taken up teaching jobs in so many universities across the country. 5. The Alternative Law ForumThese are only a few examples. The rants such as in the present article are usually from alumni who are guilty about not having the guts to contribute to the social revolution that has already started. Aishwarya Rai ". Aishwarya Rai, La La Land
- 2. "These rankings are false.....". Xyz, Mumbai
- 3. "Er, why is joining the bar a 'courageous' decision again? Oh RIGHT, being paid less to do the same rubbish gives litigation lawyers moral superiority!". Bahumbug, Bangalore
- 4. "I don't understand continued rants about tuition fees. OF COURSE the tuition fees should be lower. OF COURSE the government should fund education. OF COURSE in an ideal world we would all live in love and harmony. But, India has people dying of hunger, unclean water and lack of access to healthcare. Every addition Rupee spent on law school education for the likes of me and the author of this article is a Rupee diverted from far more productive uses in a country like ours. India does not have the money to fund law school education for a kids who want to be lawyers. Given the limited amount of money available to the Government for funding law schools, engineering schools, drama schools, film schools and the like, there are two options:a. Low tuition fees; mostly bad teachers, some good teachers (despite the rubbish money); bad infrastructure.b. High tuition fees; better teachers; better infrastructure. I go with (b). Everyone who cannot afford law school education (and frankly, even those who can) should take a loan. At the end of law school, those who select alternate careers can have a part or all of their loans written off - 'cross subsidisation' by their higher earning classmates. Naturally, this will not be possible if 1 person joined Amarchand and everyone else joined a NGO - but then tough luck, there has to be a limit on the number of people who can be educated for free? ". AyeCaramba, London, UK
- 5. "dear miss aishwarya rai, i really hate to burst your bubble,but maybe YOU need to get some facts straight.the mighty individual who has written the article is in fact intricately involved with the Salwa Judum case. In fact, i believe that most what is being argued or briefed is actually his work. it's a pity he's sitting in oxford and sucking lollipops and so he can't be here to physically be involved in the matter.secondly, i don't think its anywhere been said that NO alumni are involved in social work.your points well taken.there are in fact quite a few as you have pointed out. but i believe the thrust of the article is for greater inclusion in the social sphere, and a change in outlook of the LAW SCHOOLS, not the STUDENTS/ALUMNI. the law schools need to infuse a greater sense of social responsibility. more IMPORTANTLY, they need to cater the needs of all sections of the society and not just the people who can afford high fees. THIS ARTICLE is more about the fallout of high fee structures than it is a rant about people who graduate from law schools. . i hope alls well in your land of milk and honey and make-up artists. reality is indeed a bitter pill.". MamboItaliano, Delhi
- 6. "The irony of law school is that Aditya Swarup needed inspiration from a New York Times article to 'muster up courage'.". Ninan Thomas, New Delhi
- 7. "@MamboItaliano - Why do you subscribe to this ridiculous philosophy that Law Schools should be guiding their students in their career choices. Law Schools are meant to teach the law. A choice in career in a personal choice and I'm bloody happy that they stay the hell out of infusing a greater sense of social responsibility in their students. And please don't flatter Mr. Swarup's ego, nobody is using any of his work in the Salwa Judum case. ". RamboItaliano, (Unknown City)
- 8. "Cannot possibly agree more with Ninan Thomas and Ramboltaliano. Why would Aditya Swarup embarrass himself by submitting this badly written, factually incorrect rant.". Shocking!, (Unknown City?)
- 9. "This is how Mr. Swarup posts this link through his Facebook profile - "There used to be a time I used to be dug deep in controversies. Time to screw law school again :)" What a desperate attempt to gain attention.". Swarup!,
- 10. "I for one dont understand national law school students need to be so defensive. This article obviously is not at jab at the students but at the system. if u want to get placed in a law firm and make 5 lakhs a year by all means go for it. no value judgement here. all i'm (and so is the author) saying is if you charge students so exorbitantly, where is there a choice? NGO's, Pro-bono work goes out the window(for a few years atleast). ". Yajas, Bangalore
- 11. "Dude Yajas: The point that both you and the author are getting wrong is that despite the high fees there are graduates who have excelled in contributing to the 'social revolution'. First people whine about the lack of good faculty and then they want to pay peanuts for tution fees. The quality of these schools is going to be directly proportionate to tution fees. Lets not even get down the subsidies road. There are more pressing commitments in this country. Besides the job offers that these kids gets on graduation ensure that any student loan can be paid off within 2 years. After that they can throw themselves into the social revolution. At the end of the day the fact remains that this article is a 'rant'. Not something that one would expect from a student studying at Oxford. ". YennaThambi, Kabul
- 12. "Campus Law Centre - Delhi University - INR 8,000thanks to govt grants". Dabangg, Delhi
- 13. "@11- ever considered that the so called success stories that everyone is mentioning here (or those who are said to hold high the flag of social consciousness up by their work) are the products of the law schools when the fees werent high. the spike up in the fee is a recent phenomena (read last two years..and hence all those who have paid this exorbitant amount have not yet passed out of law schools!). the question is whether it will be easy for them (financially), unless they come from families who have [Edited] silver somethings up their somewhere (at the risk of a mild generaliation)..it will be hugely challenging to join professions which pay less (and such are the professions where you make social impact!).@ no. 3 - I am a corporate lawyer and still believe that taking up litigation (without no family backing) is a courageous decision. Who said it gave the litigators a moral high ground (apart from the fact that they decided to do what they wanted to and not succumb to a high paying corporate jobs, which most of them could have easily got, if they wanted). You cant shy away from the fact that at least 40% (again its a made up statistic..not coming out of anywhere but just by estimate!) of the present day corporate lawyers would have joined litigation had it paid them the same as a corporate job. So to join litigation without having that sense of financial security is, if not anything else, definitely courageous.@no.7- dear rambo--maybe you are still stuck in Afghanistan post your third sequel, where it might be true that educational institutes are meant to only teach the subjects and not anything else (what if they only told you how to make your muscles and nothing about handling the gun...then how wud you have made your movies) (jokes apart)... does this imply that there should be no modelling of your thoughts at any edu institutes?? if you are a lawyer (and are not coming from a lawyer family), let me as you the number of avenues you knew about with a career in law before you actually came to law school [and all you NLSIU ppl, this does mean "all law schools" and not the one in nagarbhavi :-) . and how many people come to law school thinking they want to take up corporate law/ any other law/go to litigation/ngo. their choices are shaped by their experience in those 5 years (ok..even the 3 years). so i think it is completely wrong to say that the sole purpose of a law school is to only teach law.time to go back to work again! ". Scooter, Heavy Traffic
- 14. "excuse typos and grammar...did not read again before posting!". Scooter, (Unknown City?)
- 15. "I agree with Ninan Thomas. Apart from the fact that this article is nothing more than a factually incorrect rant masquerading as (self-styled) 'detailed, factual analysis', I can't believe his inspiration is David Segal's article, which is about how US law school grads are finding it hard to find well paying jobs after getting their degrees. By that metric, the national law schools that this article focuses on are actually quite successful, considering that most graduates would be able to pay off any student loans they might have had to take, within a very reasonable period of time after graduation.". Anon,
- 16. "Some people have taken this article to be a rant against NLSIU, while some have taken this to be a well-articulated opinion over the cost of pursuing legal education. I think it isn't be about either, but instead about how to make legal education more accessible to the masses. That does not in itself mean lowering fees, since there are obviously students who can afford to pay them. What it means is lowering the fees for those who belong to a lower strata of society. How difficult is that to gauge? However, if Aditya is hinting at lowering the admission standards for those that are less financially endowed, I would vehemently disagree. That wouldn't do anything for the student admitted or the law school or the learning environment. This is a problem that has no quick-fix solution and should best be tackled at the very beginning by reforming the primary and secondary school system in India. If the author sees the lowering of admission standards in the tertiary edcuation system as a cure for the evils that have taken deep root in the primary and secondary education system, he is incorrect.". Schodes Rollar, (Unknown City)
- 17. "how can people be so foolish and have started criticizing the article written by someone which is so true.? I know the way this National Law school's are charging such a high fees bcos every year i have been paying the fee. nd it is not wrong to be pointed out. NUJS is charging such a high fee bcos the state government is not funding it with anything. but i justify on the part of NUJS to hike its fee .. ". Unknown, Bombay
- 18. "Someone said if the fees were to be lower they'd have bad profs. Well, I pay real high fees for the NLU I'm in and my profs aren't really good. Mr. Swarup (who I believe is Rhodes Scholar 2010) has written largely the truth, the government could help all our cases by giving us a little more money. I know of NLUs which are cash-strapped so badly. . . . .the state govt. gives them no money, they somehow run the show. NLUs need to get together and get their right rather than fighting with each other.". Hosni Mubarak, Cairo, Egypt
- 19. "This India Today rankin is abs wrong....the author must be aware of this..". Abcd, Gurgaon
- 20. "it is interesting to see how bunch of NLSIU fanatics have rejected this piece all together....and another set of desperate NUJS people cribbing about the article...it is important that all article should not be looked from the standpoint of inter law school rivalry but one should realize that Swarup is somewhere right..it is hard for a middle class family to even think about sending their children to law school because of the exorbitant fees coupled with the fact that another chunk of money is spend in internships and attending conferences "if u want to have a good CV"...summing up grow up law school kids ( including pass out) and worry about the means also rather than thinking about end and getting as happy as possible..p.s. i m not from NALSAR ". Grow Up, (Unknown City?)
- 21. "Ahhhh this site doesnt allow adverse comments on Swarup is it??? You moderator, are hand in hand with the authors! Chill dude, I know who you are. ". Ranting Bulbul, Beirut
- 22. "First, Mr Swarup, I'm disappointed. For someone who's been writing about law school education - you're the last one I would expect to quote some hogwash India Today "rankings" in your article. That tells me that you're fetching for attention or any form of reaction from readers. I strongly believe that maturity in writing about law school education must take into account the credibility of the rankings cited (so, quote from one which actually asses schools on the quality of legal education being imparted, the qualifications and the academic contributions of the faculty, etc - like the recent Lawyers Update magazine rankings). ". P, Hyde
- 23. "First, Mr Swarup, I'm disappointed. For someone who's been writing about law school education - you're the last one I would expect to quote some hogwash India Today "rankings" in your article. That tells me that you're fetching for attention or any form of reaction from readers. I strongly believe that maturity in writing about law school education must take into account the credibility of the rankings cited (so, quote from one which actually asses schools on the quality of legal education being imparted, the qualifications and the academic contributions of the faculty, etc - like the recent Lawyers Update magazine rankings). Second, I agree there is a genuine concern with the steep fee that we pay. But, if I had to choose between the steep fee or subsidized fee with poor academic quality and / or heavier reservations in these schools, I'd prefer the former any day. This isn't an India specific problem - quality education is expensive in most parts of the world, which is why the general trend is to opt for well paying careers to clear college debts and then looking at other choice of careers. Is it necessarily the law schools which must be blamed? Why shouldn't the take the responsibility for the pittance thrown towards young litigators? All in all, I expect to see this problem persisting for many years to come, and the only way out is a concerted effort towards better quality of law schools (ie, looking beyond only the handful of national law schools and regularizing the curriculum at the remaining 800 schools), attracting worthy talent in the form of faculty and obtaining alternate sources of funding without the added strain of state reservations. For my batch at NUJS (2011 and before), a general category student would've paid between Rs 6-7 lakh over 5 years - which, if on college debt, they could easily clear in about a year working at a firm and then look at a transition towards teaching / litigation / etc. NUJS has faced hardships in attracting state funds because it has rejected, unlike NALSAR, the governments' demand for state reservations. The fee has increased, but so have the starting packages at most firms. The current system works, and, like I said, I don't see any across the board change any time soon. For the long term, schools will have to line up alternate funding (already being worked on), the quality at cheaper law schools will need to be improved (the BCI is making attempts), and the bar will have to make efforts to attract younger talent. Isn't there something wrong when full time litigators earn less than novice interns at firms?". P, Hyderabad
- 24. "Are you trying to suggest that the elite National Law Universities must charge a paltry sum in order to prove that they're serving a public purpose? That's the crappiest argument I've heard in ages! Would that mean graduates from these institutes would automatically stop chasing careers in corporate law and become humble servants to the poor and downtrodden? Does broadening the field to include those coming from poor families automatically mean that these people would "give something back" to society? Will lower fees not result in poorer infrastructure and a failure to attract the best faculty, thus totally destroying the cutting edge these universities have?And who says European universities are free or low-cost? Are you paying a pittance in Oxford? The best universities charge you as much as the best universities in the US - and that is why they are the best.". Concerned Citizen, City Of God
- 25. "I went through this post as well as the comments.and it has been such an amazing read!!! I agree to a substantial extent with Swarup's views. I may wish to believe that there is definitely a trace of libertarian influence as well as possibly a disconnect with a lot of ground realities (which may be understandable to an extent)in the comments. I would not be surprised if the opinions change once people gather more experience and encounter with alternate realities...wishing everyone all the very best..:-)". Jishi, Mumbai
- 26. "it is interesting to see how bunch of NLSIU fanatics have rejected this piece all together....and another set of desperate NUJS people cribbing about the article...it is important that all article should not be looked from the standpoint of inter law school rivalry but one should realize that Swarup is somewhere right..it is hard for a middle class family to even think about sending their children to law school because of the exorbitant fees coupled with the fact that another chunk of money is spend in internships and attending conferences "if u want to have a good CV"...summing up grow up law school kids ( including pass out) and worry about the means also rather than thinking about end and getting as happy as possible..p.s. i m not from NALSAR ". Grow Up Kids, (Unknown City?)
- 27. "excuse typos and grammat...did not read again before posting!". Scooter, (Unknown City?)
Other Columns
- Issues in the Acquisitions of Technology Companies
- CLAT Guru Rajneesh Singh predicts CLAT 2012 expected Cut Off
- The Five Sins of CLAT 2012
- CLAT- Putting things in perspective, and the way ahead
- Working Title: The Lawyer and the Photographer
- Building a Law School from Scratch: The Story of Christ College of Law
- Tax on share premium: Remedy for money laundering or a startup bottleneck?
Top News
- BCI to start Phase-Wise Agitation to oppose Higher Education Bill; July 11 and 12 to be Protest Days; Dharna at Jantar mantar in August
- End of Venture Capital Fund Regulations; SEBI notifies Alternate Investment Fund Regulations
- SILF supports Nariman for President of India; Says no one knows the working of the Constitution better
- Re-Upped Round up May 22
- Supreme Court Lawyers Welfare Trust encourages young talent; Introduces 2 annual fellowships
- Re-Upped Round up May 21
- Clasis Law moves to a larger office space in Delhi
AZB and Sidley Austin help Kae Capital raise funds
May 23, 2012 | Mumbai-based KAE Capital, an early-stage fund floated by angel investor Sasha Mirchandani has raised Rs. 13.85 crore (approx. $2.6 million) from domestic investors and has also raised an offshore fund with a target size of $24 million (approx. Rs.127 crore). comments (0)
- Amarchand and Weil Gotshal lead on Piramal Healthcare’s acquisition of US-based Decision Resources Group
- AZB, DLA and JSA help Dutch Manager APG to invest Rs. 650 crore in Lemon Tree Hotels
- Amarchand and Desai Diwanji help Nagpur Automotive acquire Adhunik Metalik’ forging subsidiary










