The Supreme Court on Tuesday directed the Bar Council of India (BCI) to establish a National Legal Academy (NLA) for advocates, modeled on the National Judicial Academy (NJA) that trains judges. The bench, comprising Justice PS Narasimha and Justice Alok Aradhe, emphasized the lack of institutionalized learning for advocates after enrolment and called for a dedicated full-time academy to address this gap.
Court's Observations on Need for Continuous Learning
The bench noted that while legal education at the entry level receives considerable attention through law universities and professional examinations, there is a glaring dearth of institutionalized learning for advocates after enrolment. The court stated, "It is necessary to establish a full-time academy, which may be called National Legal Academy (NLA) for lawyers, like National Judicial Academy that has been established for training and capacity building for judges." Such an institution would enable post-enrolment structural learning, enhance professional competence, ethical awareness, technological adaptability, and long-term planning and corroboration.
Directions to BCI
The court directed BCI to constitute a team of senior and junior lawyers as well as experts in establishing academic institutions to consider, discuss, and evolve the idea of establishing an NLA. The bench expressed hope that BCI would rise to the occasion and reflect on all these issues, and inform the court of its decision. The matter has been posted for further directions on August 31, with BCI directed to file an affidavit indicating developments a week before the next hearing.
The bench highlighted that there is no dearth of expertise, experience, vision, and wisdom among members of the Bar, and all that is required is to bring them together to enable the idea to take shape. It emphasized that to achieve these objectives, serious consideration should be given to institutionalizing "future continuous" learning for lawyers, moving away from episodic seminars and conferences to more serious and committed learning.
Context of the Case
The directions were issued on a petition challenging the Indian Banks' Association's decision to place an advocate on its 'caution list' after his removal from a panel by Canara Bank in connection with a 'wrong' legal opinion. Allowing the advocate's appeal, the Supreme Court set aside the Allahabad High Court's order and declared that inclusion of the appellant's name in the Caution List was impermissible and without jurisdiction. The court ordered the immediate removal of the appellant's name from the Caution List.
The bench ruled that while banks have a choice to remove a counsel from their panel, there cannot be a public declaration about such action. It further stated that matters relating to professional conduct or misconduct of lawyers fall within the exclusive domain of BCI.
Broader Implications for Legal Profession
The court observed that laws and renewed knowledge of its subjects are ever evolving, and the technique of persuasion-advocacy, as well as adjudicatory methods, require simplification and refinement. Societal expectations of higher standards of inclusiveness, accountability, and transparency require lawyers to equip themselves not only with updated legal knowledge but also with evolving ethical and social responsibilities. The bench noted that statutes are amended, regulatory frameworks evolve, constitutional doctrines develop, and judicial precedents continuously reshape the understanding of law. With increasing technological infusion in the profession and growing complexity of commercial and financial transactions, it has become all the more necessary for lawyers to remain updated and professionally equipped.
