"Where is the money coming from?" Supreme Court flags concerns over Bar body elections

The Supreme Court on Wednesday expressed concern over the large sums of money that are generally spent by candidates in elections to Bar Councils and Bar Associations [Re: Strengthening and Enhancing the Institutional Strength of Bar Associations]..A Bench of Justices Surya Kant and Dipankar Datta remarked that the issue needs to be comprehensively examined.The Court was hearing a suo motu case initiated to frame guidelines to strengthen Bar bodies across the country.During today's hearing, Senior Advocate Arvind Datar referred to allegations that admission to Bar associations are arbitrary, while making submissions on possible areas of reforms. "The number of lawyers coming in are huge. They want to get into a good (Bar) association. What should be the guidelines? One allegation is (that) it is arbitrary. Role of Bar association, criteria for admissions, facilities we can offer, contentious (issue) is whether we can remove. Then (comes) elections!" he said.Datar's parting remark led Justice Kant to comment on how elections for the officer bearers of Bar bodies are generally conducted. "At present how much money is being spent on elections? From where this money is coming? Who is responsible? And then so many election petitions challenging the elections! We are not on any particular council or association. Maybe there should be an independent arbitrator for this. Please identify the issues that require to be comprehensively addressed," Justice Kant said. .The Court also pointed out that there were complaints of persons with criminal backgrounds being elected as office bearers."There needs to be discipline and perhaps some orientation. So, (it's) not only about entrance to the Bar, but why not even minimum criteria to be elected? Some Bars we are getting complaints that person with criminal backgrounds are getting elected. What do we do?" the Bench asked..The Court had earlier impleaded the Bar Council of India (BCI), various State Bar Councils, Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA), the Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record Association (SCAORA) and various Bar associations across High Courts as parties to the case.In the last hearing, it had also remarked that Bar councils and Bar associations should be freed from politics to tackle other problems ailing lawyers..Today, Justice Kant provided some more clarity on the nature of the present proceedings, saying the Court was focusing on institutional reforms."We are not on grievances, but reforms. We understand ... that these are like cooperative societies that do not want any reform, that they will avoid. In no uncertain terms we are saying this, all Bar associations have to understand. We know how to deal with this. We have to take a look at they are functioning and how judiciary is also being paralysed. Pan India basis. Let us see what should be criteria for admitting members to the Bar, in district (courts), Supreme Court etc. Should it be uniform or tiered?" he observed.The Bench acknowledged the fact that some of the existing rules governing Bar body elections, like the rule that an advocate can vote in only one Bar association's elections, is hard to enforce.It added that regional differences will also be there depending on the nature of the Bar body and the fees charged..The counsel representing various Bar bodies sought time to collate and get back to the Court on the reforms desired.As the hearing drew to a close, Justice Kant added that the proceedings are not meant to be adversarial in any sense."Let us make it clear it is not adversarial litigation. We are concerned with the profession's stature and making investment on long term basis, ultimately. It does not matter when I or my brother will retire. Comprehensive suggestions are needed," he said..The Court also appointed SCAORA president Vipin Nair as the nodal counsel to collate suggestions made by Bar associations..Senior Advocate S Prabakaran was appointed as nodal counsel to collate suggestions from State Bar Councils.He was representing the Bar Council of India in the matter..Senior Advocate K Parameshwar was appointed Amicus Curiae, and assist in formulation of the issues to be addressed post the compilation of all suggestions..The suo motu case was initiated after a lawyer levelled allegations of discrimination against the Madras Bar Association.The Court registered a suo motu case on the larger issues involved, after it was urged to consider framing uniform guidelines to strengthen Bar Associations across India.Senior Counsel Arvind Datar and Shekhar Naphade appeared for various parties today. Senior Advocate Mohit Mathur appeared for the Delhi High Court Bar Association..[Read order]