“SC Advocates for More Inclusive Senior Designation Process, Citing Lack of Opportunities for Trial Court Lawyers”
In a significant move, the Supreme Court of India has flagged the lack of opportunities for trial court lawyers in the senior designation process, emphasizing that senior designations cannot be the monopoly of Supreme Court and High Court advocates.
Background and Concerns
The current senior designation system has been criticized for being biased towards SC and HC advocates. The Supreme Court noted that trial court lawyers face significant barriers in scoring points for “reported judgments,” a crucial criterion for senior designation. This is because only judgments from the Supreme Court and High Courts are reported in accredited law reports.
Need for Inclusive Policy
The Supreme Court recognized the importance of inclusivity in the senior designation process, stating that trial court lawyers have the ability, standing, and experience in law, but lack opportunities for senior designation. The Court emphasized that the designation of senior advocates should not be limited to SC and HC advocates, but should also consider the merits of trial court lawyers.
Existing Guidelines and Shortcomings
The existing guidelines for senior designation, as outlined in the Indira Jaising case (2017 and 2023), have been criticized for being opaque and biased towards SC and HC advocates. The guidelines emphasize the importance of reported judgments, pro bono work, and publication of academic articles, but fail to provide adequate opportunities for trial court lawyers to demonstrate their merit.
Proposed Reforms
To address the concerns of trial court lawyers, the Supreme Court has proposed reforms to the senior designation process. The Court has suggested that the guidelines should be modified to provide more opportunities for trial court lawyers to demonstrate their merit, such as through their performance in trial courts and their contribution to the legal profession.
Perspectives and Implications
The Supreme Court’s move to seek a more inclusive senior designation policy has been welcomed by many in the legal fraternity. Trial court lawyers have long felt marginalized in the senior designation process, and the Court’s recognition of their merits is a significant step towards promoting inclusivity and diversity in the legal profession.
However, some have expressed concerns that the proposed reforms may dilute the standards for senior designation. They argue that the existing guidelines are in place to ensure that only the most meritorious advocates are designated as senior advocates.
Ultimately, the Supreme Court’s move to seek a more inclusive senior designation policy is a positive step towards promoting diversity and inclusivity in the legal profession. It is essential that the proposed reforms are carefully considered to ensure that they promote meritocracy while also providing opportunities for trial court lawyers to demonstrate their merit.
