The recent Bar Council of India (BCI) circular mandating a minimum stipend for junior advocates is a commendable move. By setting a baseline of ₹20,000 for urban areas and ₹15,000 for rural regions, the BCI addresses the financial hurdles that young legal professionals often face at the start of their careers. However, there's a crucial aspect that warrants deeper reflection: the language and mindset surrounding these stipends.
The circular refers to the stipend as "financial support" for junior advocates, framing it as a form of assistance rather than rightful compensation for their work. This distinction might seem minor, but has significant implications for how the legal profession perceives its youngest members - and how they perceive themselves.
A matter of entitlement, not benevolence
Labelling the stipend as "financial support" suggests an act of goodwill or charity from senior advocates or law firms. This language unintentionally portrays junior advocates as dependents, implying they are recipients of generosity rather than professionals earning their livelihood through hard work. It perpetuates a dynamic where juniors may feel obliged to be grateful for what they receive instead of confidently asserting what they rightfully deserve.
In reality, junior advocates play a pivotal role both inside and outside the courtroom. They are often tasked with significant physical labour: standing long hours in court, carrying heavy physical files, and managing the manual processes of filing - including punching, stitching, and binding. Their contributions are invaluable, and they should be compensated accordingly, just like any other professional providing services. The legal profession prides itself on principles of justice and fairness. Shouldn't these principles extend to junior advocates within the profession as well?
Addressing the power imbalance
The terminology of "support" reflects deeper power imbalances in the legal field. Senior advocates and large firms wield considerable influence, while junior advocates often rely on them not just for mentorship, but also for their livelihood. When stipends are framed as financial support, it reinforces this power dynamic, making juniors hesitant to demand fair treatment. The underlying message is that the stipend is a favour, not something they are entitled to due to their labour.
This is not a mere theoretical concern. Fresh law graduates often endure long hours and heavy workloads with little to no guaranteed income. The stipend is not a gift; it's payment for services rendered, a means to ensure that those entering the legal field are not exploited under the guise of "learning opportunities."
Promoting dignity and professionalism
The BCI's initiative is praiseworthy, but it is imperative to reframe the conversation. Rather than "supporting" junior advocates, BCI must recognise them as professionals entitled to fair pay for their work.
Moving forward, the BCI must rethink its approach to stipends. First, the language used in the BCI’s circulars should clearly state that stipends are remuneration for work performed, not a form of charity or financial support. By rephrasing the stipend as compensation, the profession can emphasise that junior advocates are entitled to fair pay for their contributions, just like any other professional.
Secondly, the implementation of these stipends should be mandatory, with exceptions allowed only in genuine cases of financial hardship. While not all firms and advocates may be in a position to offer the same level of support, those who can afford to pay should be required to do so. This will help minimise the potential misuse of flexibility and ensure that most junior advocates receive a fair stipend for their work.
Additionally, the BCI and state bar councils must take an active role in ensuring accountability. Stipend payments should be closely monitored, and firms should be required to report compliance on a regular basis. Annual reporting, as suggested in the BCI circular, is a step in the right direction, but it must be enforced with concrete action against those who do not comply.
Finally, there needs to be a cultural shift within the legal profession. Senior advocates and law firms should view fair compensation not as a burdensome requirement, but as a professional responsibility. When junior advocates are fairly compensated and mentored, their contributions to the profession improve, and the entire legal ecosystem becomes healthier and more productive. Fair pay, combined with effective mentorship, will create an environment where junior advocates can thrive and feel respected in their roles.
Conclusion
Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud has urged the legal community to "shed away the paternalistic approach that they (junior lawyers) have come to learn and get exposure and experience, and that you are mentoring them," highlighting the pressing need to re-evaluate how the legal profession treats its junior members. In an era where young legal professionals face intense competition and financial challenges, it's crucial to recognise their right to fair compensation. The BCI's circular is a positive beginning, but both its language and the profession's mindset need to evolve.
It is time to stop perceiving stipends as mere financial support and acknowledge them for what they truly are: rightful compensation for the valuable work junior advocates contribute to the legal profession. By doing so, the principles of justice and fairness that are the bedrock of the legal field will be upheld, ensuring that every advocate - junior or senior - is treated with the respect and dignity they deserve.
Jehosh Paul is a lawyer and research consultant.
He expresses his gratitude to Advocates Bhairav Kuttaiah and Abhishek Raj for their valuable inputs.