[Exclusive]: Articulated vision is need of the hour, SILF on the BCI Draft Rules

A committee formed by the Society of Indian Law Firms (SILF) has submitted its comments on the controversial BCI Draft Rules on the entry of foreign lawyers to Law Secretary Suresh Chandra..The Law Secretary Suresh Chandra had held a meeting on July 5 with all the stakeholders, including SILF and FICCI to discuss the BCI Draft Rules, wherein SILF was given four weeks to submit its comments. Pursuant to that, SILF had formed a committee chaired by V Lakshmikumaran to draft the comments..The SILF has now submitted a Cover Note, comments on Draft Rules, and a note on reciprocity..The Cover Note states, amongst other things, that,.“An articulated vision for the Indian profession – particularly in the context of globalization is the need of the hour.”.According to SILF,.“The approach has to be long term. Ad-hoc and one off decisions on a random basis without keeping our eye on the future is not the answer. The reform process must address the requirements of the profession and its growth over decades..…Irrespective of whether this profession is opened to foreign lawyers and foreign firms or not, there are inherent weaknesses and regulatory gaps that need to be addressed in the long-term interests of the sector.”.In its Cover Note [see below), SILF notes that in order to reform a sector, one has to ask some questions to know more about the environment. Some of the questions put forth include: How is the legal services market segmented – on the demand side and the supply side?.The BCI’s Draft Rules, however, fail to take into account these issues according to the SILF..Another aspect that SILF mentions in its note is the mere size of Indian law firms..“[The] practice of corporate law in a law firm environment is of relatively recent origin in India. Our so called national large firms are still of a miniscule size compared to law firms in most developed jurisdictions. Do not ignore the size and reach of the large firms with 4000+ lawyers and billions of dollars of top-lines.” .SILF then emphasizes that the opening up of the legal sector in other countries was based on a phased approach. To this end, it points to the three-phased approach and suggests several proactive and sustained steps to be taken to unshackle the domestic firms. These steps include enabling law firms to operate in LLP format, allowing firms to have websites etc..However, the proposed BCI Rules do not indicate anything about Phase I and its accomplishment. On the other hand, SILF states that there appears to be a misunderstanding and confusion in the approach; particularly, the proposed Rules 9(ii) and ((iv), which refer to relationship of foreign lawyers with Advocates in practice of Indian law which, in any situation, would be elements of Phase III. These sub-rules enable practice of Indian law, directly and indirectly from the very first day..SILF further points out that the draft rules are somewhat lacking as concerns registration of foreign law firms. The proposed rules include firms, LLP, corporations as part of definition of “foreign lawyers” – this, as per SILF, is unconventional..Another aspect that has been highlighted is foreign lawyers being “deemed as Advocates”. There are concerns on Rule 8 which describes what foreign lawyers can do. And lastly, there are critical elements of Rule 9 concerning relationship with the local bar which SILF believes has no place in Phase II architecture..Read SILF’s Cover Note below:.Below is a detailed table of SILF’s comments on the Rules: