Regulation of Legal Education Law Ministry v HRD Ministry BCI upset Lawyers to protest

The Bar Council of India (BCI) has resolved to oppose the proposal moved by the Ministry of Human Resource Development (HRD Ministry) which is headed by Kapl Sibal to bring legal education under the National Commission for Higher Education and Research (NCHER). The Higher Education and Research Development Bill, 2011 (the Bill) was introduced by the HRD Ministry before Rajya Sabha on December 27, 2011..The Bar Council of India (BCI) has resolved to oppose the proposal moved by the Ministry of Human Resource Development (HRD Ministry) which is headed by Kapl Sibal to bring legal education under the National Commission for Higher Education and Research (NCHER). The Higher Education and Research Development Bill, 2011 (the Bill) was introduced by the HRD Ministry before Rajya Sabha on December 27, 2011..The inclusion of legal education under the NCHER will broadly mean control over legal education courses being taught in 913 colleges, 260 universities and 14 national law schools across India..Through the NCHER, the government aims to set up a super regulator, which would subsume existing regulatory bodies such as UGC, All India Council for Technical Education and National Council for Teachers Education to bring transparency in regulating higher education, reports HT..The Law Ministry had raised objections before the matter was taken to the Cabinet. “To meet the emerging challenges of legal profession and education, a separate independent and specialized body is required. The law ministry is working towards that and had assured the parliament in this regard” stated a ministry note signed by law minister Salman Khurshid on December 11..The BCI has strongly condemned this move by the HRD Ministry, believing it to be an attempt to encroach the powers conferred, for almost 50 years, on the BCI and the State Bar Councils under the Advocates Act, 1961 (the Act)..Section 6 and 7 of the Act, gives power to the BCI and the State Bar Councils to promote legal education and to lay down standards of such education in consultation with the universities imparting such education..According to the BCI Press Release, the Bill proposes to vest all these powers with NCHER constituting of a few academicians in comparison to the present legal education committee of the Bar council of India headed by a retired Judge of Supreme Court. The legal education committee of the BCI consists of top legal luminaries including sitting Honourable Chief Justice of a High Court, a distinguished Professor of Law, The Law Secretary, the Attorney General, the Solicitor General of India, UGC Chairman and five elected members of the BCI..The BCI argues that the Bill in its present form will lead to bureaucratization. It visualizes that the proposed commission will not be able to cater to the needs of all the professional courses or subjects as with over centralized power, innovation and quick decision making will be at stake..The HRD ministry has a different take saying many law colleges were being run by universities and excluding them from the ambit of the proposed council would have defeated the purpose of having a uniform regulator for higher education. Furthermore, the Bill does attach some importance to those with practical experience in legal education. Under Section 26 of the Bill, the General Council of the NCHER must include the Head of the BCI India and one Vice Chancellor of the National Law Universities. The Chairman of the BCI shall de facto preside over the Expert Advisory Group on legal education..The BCI however, remains unimpressed. It states that it has served the cause of legal profession with honour and dignity over the last 50 years and that it has conducted all its programmes without seeking any help, financial or otherwise from anyone else. The BCI has unanimously resolved to urge lawyers all over India to observe January 20, 2012 as a protest day against the Bill..Speaking to Bar & Bench, Ashok Parija said, “There is no strike planned anywhere. Lawyers don’t go on strike. The Supreme Court has said lawyers should not go on strike. We are aggrieved and therefore observing January 20th as a protest day against this new Higher Education Bill. We had earlier sent memorandums to the HRD ministry to keep the Advocates Act out of the purview of this Bill despite which it seeks to encroach into the functions and duties of the Advocates Act.”.He further said, “The position of the Bar Council is that we are all for reforms in education. The Bill is fine as long as it does not encroach into the Advocates Act”.“The second step is we are preparing a memorandum and we have already spoken to the Hon’ble law Minister, Salman Khurshid. He has assured me that they will take up the matter with the HRD Ministry” say Ashok Parija..The BCI has further resolved to convene a joint meeting of the BCI and the Chairman or their nominees of all the State Bar Councils on January 23, 2012 to hold a meeting for deciding the future course of action..“There is no way the lawyers will allow the Government to get the legislation passed. It is an attempt to restrict the freedom of the legal sector” says Lekh Raj Sharma, Chairman, Bar Council of Punjab and Haryana. reports Indian Express..“The budget session is still two months away. Things might be sorted out well before time”, says Ashok Parija when asked of his plans if the Bill becomes a reality..On the contrary, J.S Patil, Vice Chancellor, Karnataka State law University has a different opinion. While speaking to Bar & Bench, he says, “BCI should not be monitoring legal education. BCI’s main role is to admit people into the Bar for which they have a separate law examination now. Law degree will not automatically admit law students to the Bar as it was earlier. So therefore now they have their own independent testing agency and methodology to admit people to the Bar”..Bar & Bench also spoke to Professor Ranbir Singh, Vice Chancellor, National Law University Delhi on the issue. He said, “As far as the Universities are concerned, the National Law Universities have been saying for a long time that we will be in favour of an independent body known as National Conference for Legal Education. It should be an absolutely independent body and it should not come under either the Law Ministry or the HRD Ministry or the BCI. The body should be such that Chief Justice of India is the Chairman and there should a very fine mix of academicians, judges and members of the BCI because the legal education in our country should be dealt on priority basis. There are more than 900 colleges, 150 law faculties and 15 law universities. We have such a wide network of institutions that we need a much wider body to adhere to the imperatives of legal education. I firmly believe that BCI should have a very important role but legal education as such cannot be left entirely to the BCI Legal Education Committee because in that committee there is only one academic weapon though they keep inviting people as special invitees. The BCI’s main function should be to enroll the judges and now they have started AIBE to see that the students have a certain standard. As far as, the monitoring of standards of legal education is concerned, it should be left to a very high-powered body and for that the Advocates Act should be amended”..It will be interesting to see how the two parties resolve this dispute in the coming days. With the growing number of national law universities and the general increase in students who opt for the LLB course, the future of the Bill shall undoubtedly play an important role in the shaping of the legal education sector in the country.