Amarchand Mangaldas partner Suhaan Mukerji, who was responsible for the firm’s public policy and lobbying-style practice in Delhi, has resigned to focus on his work as expert advisor to Sam Pitroda, Office of Adviser to the Prime Minister of India on Public Information Infrastructure and Innovations (PIII), according to legal website Bar & Bench.
Mukerji, who was promoted to Amarchand’s partnership in 2010 after becoming partner designate in 2009, had specialised in public policy and regulatory reform, legislative drafting and government affairs, according to his Linked-in profile. He had joined Amarchand in 2002 after two years as an analyst at the World Bank, an LLB from NLSIU Bangalore and an LLM from the London School of Economics (LSE). Amarchand Delhi managing partner Shardul Shroff wished Mukerji well.
Mukerji told Legally India that he had already joined the PIII but he did not know if anyone would take over his former role at Amarchand. Amarchand was not reachable for comment by Legally India at the time of going to press.
His former practice at Amarchand is understood to include advocacy for policy changes, drafting legislation for government departments, as well as government affairs work.
This is similar to the work done by lobbying practice groups at international law firms in Washington DC, for example, but is understood not to include approaching political parties on behalf of clients to influence policy.
Mukerji was also closely involved in Amarchand Delhi’s pro bono practice.
According to its website, the PIII’s mission is to effect a “roadmap for innovation geared towards meeting the challenges of the 21st century”, including:
Operationalising the National Knowledge Network to interconnect all educational and research institutions
Overseeing broadband connectivity to Panchayats and enabling citizen interface to improve delivery of public services and citizen empowerment
Promoting greater use of Information Communications Technology in Public Transport Systems
Promoting greater use of Information Communications Technology in the Justice System
Developing an Action Plan for a Decade of Innovation
Comments
Completely agree with you. For a change LI has the guts to call a spade a spade. I think an RTI should be filed to unearth how much government work is going to which firm, and whether taxpayers money is being squandered.
Completely agree with you. For a change LI has the guts to call a spade a spade. I think an RTI should be filed to unearth how much government work is going to which firm, and whether taxpayers money is being squandered.[/quote]
Can't wait for firms/reporters/job descriptions to come up with titles such as Jugaad Practice Partner, Head of our Jugaad Operations, Opening for Jugaad Associate (should inherit/immediate relative of x net worth of business owner) (Degree from Amity or Rai University prerequisite), Opening for Associate(Should be bff with any of my niece or nephew)... would save a lot of trouble for us 'stainless steel spoon' idiots.
There is a distinction between lobbying and fixing that is not always apparent in India. the term lobbying thus has negative connotations in India.
Just because some US law firms choose to call their lobby groups 'public policy and government affairs' practice groups, does not mean that they don't practice lobbying...
The writer and LI cannot be sued for defamation. I think Kian called a spade a spade but has now unfortunately under duress have had to buckle to AMSS pressure.
Incidentally, SILF is also identified as a "lobby group" and one of their main agendas is to prevent foreign firms from coming into India.
I'd be interested in knowing more about similar practices in Indian law firms, actually. As far as I know, there are very few formal groups with this title (or that do the equivalent of lobbying), but a lot of law firms and senior partners do activities which are basically lobbying-light or government liaison (nothing illegal, mind you, as far as I know).
And how would 'public policy' within that context differ from 'government affairs', if at all? Examples would be welcome...
I'd be interested in knowing more about similar practices in Indian law firms, actually. As far as I know, there are very few formal groups with this title (or that do the equivalent of lobbying), but a lot of law firms and senior partners do activities which are basically lobbying-light or government liaison (nothing illegal, mind you, as far as I know).
And how would 'public policy' within that context differ from 'government affairs', if at all? Examples would be welcome...[/quote]
This is similar to the work done by lobbying practice groups at international law firms in Washington DC, for example, but is understood [b]not to include approaching political parties on behalf of clients to influence policy.[/b] what an accurate correction. Shame on the rest of you ;)
How does it matter? Its been over a decade since he graduated and has gathered significant experience in the profession, having worked with World Bank and AMSS. Does it really matter what one has done in college, school or in kindergarten when he has been working for ten years? Similarly, does it matter if you stood first in your Class XII and then did nothing of worth in your private practice?
Stop this bitchiness and appreciate that a person has achieved more than most people in the profession
It does not matter now what happened 10 years ago, except it is worth bearing in mind some of the comments made by a retired judge who conducted the inquiry. Kian, if I were you, I would try and get the record of the inquiry - it is covered bythe RTI Act.
Yes, you already know the background (see comments above). He made a mistake (maybe a criminal offence, as you say), was punished, got a degree a year late, went to LSE, worked in World Bank, was Partner in AMSS. So now what?
Screw him for the rest of his life? Get a life you prick.
And you talk about holding public funded office. Think about the people you and I elect to more important public positions, and you have your answer
Did you lose your job because of Suhan?
By the way, there are criminal offences which are covered by limitation. You have absolutely no idea. So why are you even mentioning it? Do you want to file an FIR or a complaint under 156(3) of Cr.PC? Grow up. Love People. Stop Hate
Please remember that publicly funded offices require full disclosure- so the appointing authority needs to know and then make a reasoned decision. Am sure many would agree with you that it was a mistake. However, the core question is, can you escape full disclosure? I think not.
Please remember that publicly funded offices require full disclosure- so the appointing authority needs to know and then make a reasoned decision. Am sure many would agree with you that it was a mistake. However, the core question is, can you escape full disclosure? I think not.[/quote]
What disclosure are you talking about? Are you asking for a full disclosure from Suhan to legallyindia for publishing this article? exactly from where is he escaping a full disclosure? How do you know what was disclosed and informed to "appointing authority"?
Stop this bloody mud-slinging and to try and appreciate people's achievements.
As regards your point about what was disclosed to the "appointing authority", the Central Government rules are very clear about the need to carry out background checks. I am sure all due process was followed - so we are on the same page.
1. when and in what capacity did he work at World Bank? The World Bank HR team will possibly be more forthcoming than the AMSS HR team.
2. given he joins a publicly funded office, the entire record pertaining to his work history ought to be public.
if any one in an indian law firm offers to influence policy for a client then the chances of that person suggesting graft are very high. Although genuine pressure groups do exist. However any genuine pressure group or advocacy group clearly identifies its role and objective, for e.g. NASSCOM, PETA etc.
AM Delhi office's senior owner's desire to be widely known as close to government is well known. Suhaan utilised this opportunity to uplift his career. Nothing wrong in that I suppose... Why go after an individual?
[quote name="assassass"]maybe the firm can step in to clarify what the lobbying practice is and if that explains a sizable chunk of billable government-work they do secure. incidentally this is the same office of the same firm that fired a principal associate in response to a rap which the firm got in some court for negligent drafting. sad. every firm has shady stuff but sad how this particular office has been "caught out" more than necessary.[/quote]
There is no such thing as lobbying that the firm does, primarily because it is a law firm and not a public relations firm. Advocacy would be a better word because there is always a lawyer-oriented approach to the work involved (as opposed to a paid activity by special interests groups). In any case, such work only forms a minor part (financially) of the overall work which I would think has to do more with interface with government/regulators and advice on emerging public policy issues such as defence, nuclear, information technology, procurement etc. And don't forget that the article also says that Suhaan Mukerji has been involved in Amarchand Delhi’s pro bono practice.
However this is India and the phrase has been conveniently used to cover legal work done for free with a clear aim to secure work, either from the beneficiary of the services or from others who would get impressed by the association of the firm with the beneficiary. as is usual in India there will be a conspiracy by silence of the individual lawyers and other law firms.
I see no reason why a law firm should remain silent after my post and not publish the details of the so called pro-bono work done by them, at least just to prove me wrong...
Overall it seems to be an odd practice. I am not sure what American firms do or are allowed to do is relevant here. There are lots of things they do which is not allowed in India or are opposed by indian law firms and silf. I am not sure how this sits with the rest of the indian lawyers are holy god men and indian law is holy cow attitude taken by indian law firms or at least their primary family owners.
As a regular reader of the site, I just wanted to point out that off late, the comments being posted on the site have become quite vicious, eg. this thread, the mud-slinging on the Finsec-Trilegal post. You should seriously not permit comments of this sort at all - constructive criticism is understandable but mud slinging and venting should not be allowed on a public forum. Trust you will agree.
Some comments are borderline, but we can't really stop people having a discussion about peoples' background.
In response to the comments about our changing the headline, it was not a decision I took lightly and easily, and it was not just made in response to an email but several rather long discussions with Suhaan Mukerji and others. While in my view, his role at Amarchand included things that could be termed as a lobbying practice, significant parts of his practice also include other elements, such as advising government on drafting legislation and clients on public policy.
Appreciate the arguments and criticisms on both sides, however.
Best wishes,
Kian
Some comments are borderline, but we can't really stop people having a discussion about peoples' background.
In response to the comments about our changing the headline, it was not a decision I took lightly and easily, and it was not just made in response to an email but several rather long discussions with Suhaan Mukerji and others. While in my view, his role at Amarchand included things that could be termed as a lobbying practice, significant parts of his practice also include other elements, such as advising government on drafting legislation and clients on public policy.
Appreciate the arguments and criticisms on both sides, however.
Best wishes,
Kian[/quote]
Kian, in my view, it does not really matter regarding a lawyer's life and activities when in college, particularly when that person has been in the profession for more than a decade, post college. Similarly, personal background, etc also does not matter. No one will give a shit if you were an university topper ten years ago (or a flunkee in college) after one works for ten years. So all these ragging related/late degree comments should have moderated.
I am not Suhaan, neither am I his friend. Just my two bits.
Most importantly, no one bothered to note that, in Mukerji's new stint, he would probably be making much less than what he was making as a Partner at AMSS. Surely, the government wont be paying him AMSS salary. Can I assume that he took this role as a zest towards "nation building" or 'CV building" for something greater than just filling the Shroff's coffers?
Agree on your point about student life, which is why it's a little silly to expect us to file an RTI on this. But I think any comments on the topic have been adequately addressed and rebutted above...
Was there another reason for his quitting AMSS?
this new role is not too great, he is part of a team advising Sam Pitroda who advises the PMO.
http://lnweb90.worldbank.org/oed/oeddoclib.nsf/DocUNIDViewForJavaSearch/ACEE14F0E07CD8F385256D0B0073946A/$file/IP_evaluation_phase_2.pdf