Indian daily the Hindustan Times reported yesterday law minister Veerappa Moily and recently elected BCI chairman and solicitor general Gopal Subramaniam had agreed about introducing the test.
“The Supreme Court had last year suggested there should be an entry-level bar exam, and the BCI will seriously implement it. It will apply to law graduates passing out from this year and those who passed the LLB earlier but had not applied for licences till now,” Subramaniam said.
There are more than a million lawyers in India “and we need to raise the standard of the profession”, he said, according to the Hindustan Times.
Subramaniam has long been an advocate of a bar exam for all Indian lawyers.
Moily (pictured) was reported as saying: “The BCI has informed the law ministry of its decision to make it mandatory for law graduates to pass an entry-level exam to be eligible for a lawyer’s licence. We welcome it.”
Details of precisely how the bar exam would be implemented logistically by September of this year or whether plans had already been made could not be confirmed at time of going to press.
An open letter to Subramaniam posted as a blog entry on Legally India yesterday (2 May) by an anonymous “Collective of Final Year Law Students” welcomed the exam although it expressed concern that job offers of final year law students could be jeopardised by the timing of the exam.
“We hope that the macro concerns of implementing this policy will not cause you to overlook the micro concerns of final year law students, who are now anxious about their future,” read the blog entry.
The statements were made during last weekend’s (1 and 2 May) National Consultation for the Second Generation of Reforms in Legal Education held in Delhi.
Next to Moily and Subramaniam, the Saturday morning’s programme included speeches by India’s prime minister Manmohan Singh, Moily’s adviser TK Vishwanathan, outgoing BCI chairman SNP Sinha, India’s attorney general Goolam Vahanvati and outgoing Chief Justice of India KG Balakrishnan.
At the event Moily also presented his second vision statement for legal education reform.
“An efficient justice system plays a vital role in our economic development – reducing pendencies alone can add about 2% to our GDP – and it is our legal education system that will provide the manpower to fuel this required efficiency,” read the vision statement.
As first reported by Legally India on 21 April, Moily also proposed the introduction of super-specialised transactional, litigation and public law LLBs, as well as continuing legal education and shortening of LLM programmes to one year.
Moily also outlined in his vision statement that he wants to “establish four national level institutions at the regional level as Centres of Excellence focussed on research and upgradation of faculty skills - these may be called Institutes of Advanced Legal Studies & Research”.
Furthermore, he proposed:
- “a National Law University established in every state as a school of excellence”,
- “each of the 913 existing law schools to be evaluated by an empowered committee and classified as per standards and needs for the purpose of upgrading such colleges and creating and providing opportunities to the students”,
- a “PPP model for law schools with specialised focus to be encouraged”,
- “autonomous colleges that will meet demanding accreditation standards to be encouraged”, and
- “continuing learning centres to be established in collaboration with the Bar Council’s Directorate of Legal Education”.
“The BCI has informed the law ministry of its decision to make it mandatory for law graduates to pass an entry-level exam to be eligible for a lawyer’s licence. We welcome it,” law minister M. Veerappa Moily said on Saturday.
Comments
But can some of you all of you please think about this:
Final year law students are being told that they have to be give this exam in September today and there is no syllabus etc notified.
We have already been offered jobs at our campuses and we are already to take them up in June and now we are being told "Sunny, first pass this exam"
Well all good if we are good enough to get the jobs we'll pass you're stupid exam too but are you giving us three months pay.
And for all of you who think that we shouldn't crib about the short notice and we should be confident about we have learnt in five years. Lets have those on the bar appear for the exam, at short notice - then we will really be separating the wheat from the chaff.
We don't want to get out of sitting for this exam by all means bring it on just give us a fair chance and don't disrupt the opportunities we have already created for ourselves. Admit us to the bar subject to our passing the exam.
Issac appeals to all Abraham(s) (read Shri.Moily and Mr. Subramaniam) - Don't butcher us at the altar of the greater common good.
the coaching institutes have started even before the exam was announced
Something fishy?
I am firmly of the opinion that Bar Exam cannot and should not be implemented in such a short notice. We should have been informed about such a massive change in the legal sphere with enough time in hand. Such a retrospective implementation will only cause problems to the current final year students. If it has to be implemented, the SC as well as Mr. Subramaniam should sit down and think of a logical date of its implementation and also as to how final year students to be treated so that their interests are best safeguarded.
Rome was not built in a day. Similarly, BCI cannot think of changing the Indian legal practice in a day, any positive change needs time and proper analysis. Bar Exam implementation is void of both the above.
In the middle of this may I ask Mr. Moily: whtevr happened to the Indian Judicial services,Sir
If the likelihood that even one of this happening is a realistic possibility, the exam will only fall into the rut that politics and money has been able to churn out.
Just because we are 'kids' doesn't mean we all have the luxury to wait till September (or even December, how soon will BCI release the result) to get our first pay
And will all you Bar members stop saying that exam at such short notice is no big deal and of course we should 'grow up'. But why didn't the grown ups do their job in time and inform us of the exam in October last when we were signing placement contracts
As a 2010 grad from a National Law University, let me add another viewpoint, and perhaps an argument, of those 2010 grads who'd be going abroad for their LL.M. (or BCL). I am obviously one, and ergo the concern.
By scheduling a bar exam in September, and prescribing it necessary for students who give their final (graduation) exams in May, the authorities (the BCI and Law Min, in particular) are wasting three months of the graduates' time (between graduation in June and the Bar Exam in September). This concern remains common to all students, I suppose.
However, for those going abroad for a post-graduate degree, there is another anomaly. Most courses begin in September, which requires the students to leave India in August. Obviously then, all those graduating in 2010, and choosing to do an LL.M. would not be able to appear for the exams in September. The only option in this case would be coming back and giving the exam in September, 2011. All this, when most of such graduates will be sitting idle (professionally, at least) for nearly two months between June and August.
Im happy with the exam, but I believe the authorities shouldnt do it on a whim. Going ahead with the exam just because it has to, has to, happen this year is not a reasoned decision. I do sincerely hope that reasonable people like Prof. Coutinho and the SG will think about this before acting.
Foreign nationals must be allowed to sit for the Bar exam. India is the ONLY G20 econoym that does not allow foreign law firms. How long is this f***ing nonsense going to go on? This is why India will always be 50 years behind China and 100 years behind America.
If they want to implement it this year - the should consider scheduling it sooner and closer to the graduating year. It's a short-notice so ideally they should do it from next year.
As already pointed out - jobs, LLMs, careers cannot be put on hold because the BCI springs a surprise on us.
If you want it to be an exam with a GOOD standard - ie, one where we all take time out to prepare for it - provide provisional affiliation with the Bar and let the students take the bar any time within the year.
Please don't take it to mean that I'm a final year student trying to get out of giving it this year. I'm in my 4th year, so I would probably be amongst the 1st lot to take it. As I see this rolling out, I doubt that they'd be able to implement it this year. Logistics, concerns and soon there'll be a mass upheaval from other law schools (remember the lawyer strikes in Delhi a few years back!?)..!
Unfunny joke, but I suppose it accurately speaks of our government's backward mentality. We would rather follow Pakistan and Malawai rather than China or the West. We would rather follow the backward Muslim countries that allow polygamy (Saudi) instead of the modern ones that do not (Turkey). We would rather base our politics on caste rather than development.
Anyway, how can a law minister who himself owns a firm (Moily & Associates) be expected to take a decision!
1. a) With a few months left to the Bar Exam (i.e. in case it happens) the syllabus is still not out.
b) The question pattern has not been notified.
c) The whole Bar Exam Notification is itself not notified.
It may be pertinent to note that all other exams which are taken by professionals, e.g. CA, CS, etc. already have at least 1 year preparation time for them. It would be grossly unfair for these final year students to appear the exam in September with so little preparation. Since, law schools are being treated at the same pedestal as other law colleges, why then even have the expectation from them that they would all pass the bar exam.
2) a) Following the last argument, is this exam made to seperate bad lawyers from good lawyers or law schools from law colleges?
b) In the event the exam is to be held either hold seperate papers for law schools and law colleges, or bring all Law Universities at par. Unless that is done it is unfair on both the parties.
3) If this 'cleaning & filtering' is to be done, why leave those graduates who have got a license before but are still bad. Isnt it just unfair to a few people because they took up law as a career at a later stage. Moreover, the quality of law students who have improved over the years. If there exists any such disparity in the quality of lawyers (as observed by both the respected gentlemen, Mr. Subramanium and Mr. Moily) it is what is already existent in the court. Why not make all lawyers subject to the Exam?
4) Since this batch is being subject to an exam to get into the bar, will that amount to a greater professional 'degree' compared to those already are in the bar? If yes then this exam is still justified to an extent. If not, then i dont see any reason, of how this exam will not just end up being a burden on the students and nothing else....!!!
I would request both Mr. Moily and Mr. Subramanium to please be reasonable in suggesting the plan of action for implementing such a huge step. The intentions are undoubtedly good, but it cannot be achieved in a day by having an exam. Please change the structure of Indian Legal Education, and then lets go ahead and talk about filtering...if Indian bar has survived without an exam so long...it can wait a bit longer till the base is fixed and the legal fraternity is ready to accept this excellent move.
hopefully, the following other amendments will also happen:
1) yes to foreign law firms
2) separation of advocates into barristers and solicitors (of course, the "genuine" London-educated barristers , primarily bengalis with a colonial hangover, will be furious!)
3) BMW-owning billionaire lawyers who pay 5000 a month to their juniors should be stripped of their licence and be named and shamed in public.
4) accountability and transparency in the bar council. presently, it's even worse than the medical council.
5) allow the law firms to have their own websites
6) allow lawyers to teach for money
but there are various questions which should be answered before conducting the examination for all. few of them i would like to highlight are:ac
1. Are we providing a "level playing field" for all the students in providing the education in order to qualify the exam?
2. are we really addressing the question of "quality of law practise" by conducting an exam?
3. what will be the level of question paper which will suit all the strata of students?
and puhlease, don't forget, the CLAT carries a reservation with it. not everyone in the reserved category is (forget good), even average.
Even people from national law schools should give this exam. otherwise, it makes no sense.
- 2009 law graduate who registered as an advocate last year :-)
These sorry excuse for human beings neither know the procedural law nor the substantive law. they only know one thing i.e. how to bribe the court babus and get work done.
The said proposal in its current form will not meet this requirement and would thus fail in its ultimate goal i.e. "to raise the standard of the bar". I would like to appeal to all the lawyers reading this to urge the BCI Chairman and the Law Ministry to make this exam mandatory for all the Advocates practicing in India. (i know it would be a logistical challenge but then... as someone said..."Rome was not built in a day".)
and one more thing....final year students please stop being such wussies and gear up for whats gonna come. if you are good at what you have studied no exam should ever be a problem.
Coming to facts, earlie, Criminal Procedure Code and Civil Procedure Code did not form part of the syllabus for taking a law degree. And that is the reason why you had to study these subjects and pass a test before you could get enrolled as an advocate in India. Subsequently Criminal Procedure Code and Civil Procedure Code became part of the LL.B syllabus. And therefore these tests became no longer necessary to enrol as advocates at the bar. So therefore why this nonsense about reintroducing the test for fresh entrants to the bar. Clearly a case of exercising undue power by the Bar Council of India which is nothing but a statutory body of advocates elected by advocates themselves. The amount of corruption that is going on in certain state bar councils could knock you dead. There should some law to check instances of corruption and victimization of advocates at the hands of bar council members. Earlier the judges of the concerned high courts were the members of the concerned state bar councils. This system should be brought back.
I am quite sure you fall in this category.... "These sorry excuse for human beings neither know the procedural law nor the substantive law. they only know one thing i.e. how to bribe the court babus and get work done"
Given the wide difference instandards of education in the various institutions awarding law degrees (and with them the right to practice) in our country, a common bar exam would go a long way in raising the bar (excuse the pun) for aspiring advocates. One can only hope and pray that the exam and standards do not get devalued under political pressure to favour special interest groups.
where does the bare act provisions come in all this??
What about people who are registered with a state bar council and want to shift there enrollment to another state bar council... will they have to undergo such exam again????
A very crucial question for Mr. Moily and an area not to be left open for creating confusion and hassle later on.
the notification still isn't out. the syllabus is going to appear a few weeks before the exam itself.
no one seems to have a problem with the bar exam.. in the end the best argument i can see against it is that it is annoying..
but they are not conducting this correctly.
APPEAL TO BCI-please if u hv smthin to introduce, do it but kindly provide us the correct developments so we can prepaire ourselves.
How a student passing out after 2009-2010 shall have to sit for exam to practise whereas a student passing a year before with the same course and syllabus are kept out.
Clearly it defies naturak justice.
The exam diminishes the value of BCI and questions about its fuctioning.
Now there is no role of BCI in approving Colleges and their Syllabus.
A nonfuctioning body should be abolished.