|
Online edition of India's National Newspaper Tuesday, October 23, 2001 |
|
Front Page |
National |
Southern States |
Other States |
International |
Opinion |
Business |
Sport |
Miscellaneous |
Features |
Classifieds |
Employment |
Index |
Home |
|
Features
| Previous
Halting progress of legal education
LEGAL EDUCATION in India has never been as good as it is today.
Of course, there are many shortcomings still to be addressed to
make it a truly professional training for preparing lawyers for
the future. Nevertheless, compared to what Setalvad found in the
Fourteenth Law Commission Report (1954) and what the Bar Council
of India discovered in its legal education survey on the eve of
introducing the five-year integrated law course (1982), we have a
system in place now which, at least in parts, is not only good
but potentially capable of becoming internationally competitive
in years to come.
What contributed to this process of change towards professional
legal education? Among other things, I would identify the
following:
(1) A bold and creative decision on the part of the Bar Council
of India, first to replace the three year (mostly part-time)
LL.B. programme with an integrated five-year LL.B. course and
secondly to try out the scheme in a model law school (National
Law School) sponsored by the BCI itself. The first initiative
happened in 1982 and the second in 1986.
(2) An acknowledgement by the BCI that their jurisdiction is
confined to professional legal education only and universities
and colleges are free to impart liberal law education in whatever
way they considered appropriate independent of the BCI. This
again happened in 1982 as part of the Rules framed for the five-
year LL.B. course.
(3) The outstanding success of the National Law School experiment
invited attention from policy planners (Committee on Subordinate
Legislation of the tenth Parliament recommended a Bangalore model
law school in every State which has been endorsed by the All
India Law Ministers Conference at Bhubaneswar in 1992), the
organised bar and the Committee of Judges on legal education
appointed by the Chief Justice of India (1993). The call was
responded by the setting up of law universities on the Bangalore
model in Hyderabad (1996), Bhopal (1997), Delhi (1998), Kolkata
(1999) and Jodhpur (2000).
(4) An organised attempt by the BCI with the assistance of the
National Law School to revamp the curriculum (1996), increasing
the number of required subjects to be taught and introducing an
imaginative component of practical training (four courses for a
total of 400 marks) to be completed at the law school in the
final year.
(5) Introduction (though aborted by a Supreme Court judgment) of
an year-long apprenticeship under a senior advocate as a pre-
requisite for enrolment as an advocate (1996).
(6) A vigorous drive to weed out so-called poor quality law
colleges around the country through physical inspection of
facilities and threat of derecognition of degrees; and finally
(7) By announcing a scheme of professional entry test to be
conducted by the BCI for foreign law degree holders to be able to
seek enrolment under the Indian Advocates Act.
A series of compromises
However, the pace of change towards improving the quality of
legal education was watered down by the very same Bar Council
through a series of compromises adopted in the course of the last
two decades. These include:
(a) allowing the three year LL.B. course to continue as before
side by side with the five-year integrated programme;
(b) not following the distinction between professional and
liberal legal education in categorising the over 500 law teaching
institutions for extending BCI jurisdiction;
) reducing the eligibility criteria for admission to the
professional law course;
(d) inability to mobilise funds for supporting improvements in
legal education, particularly among institutions located outside
metropolitan cities;
(e) inability to revive the pre-enrolment apprenticeship scheme
or any other viable alternative to ensure minimum professional
competence on the part of fresh entrants to the profession;
(f) inability to deter full-time teachers from practising law and
thereby depriving students of the benefit of services of these
teachers; and
(g) inability to provide any meaningful guidance for
institutionalising clinical teaching (of skills) and imparting
education on professional ethics.
The Government of India also contributed to this decline by
refusing to amend the relevant provisions of the Advocates Act
even after repeated approaches by the Bar Council of India.
Meanwhile there are media reports that the Government of India
through the Ministry of Law is bringing forward a Bill to
establish a national law university with multiple campuses in
different regions, ostensibly to improve the quality of legal
education.
The University Grants Commission, which is in control of higher
education generally, has conveniently avoided paying attention to
legal education except perhaps for their one-time effort in
curriculum development way back in the 1980s. Thus legal
education is left with multiple controllers with little or no
accountability. Even the accreditation mechanism put in place by
the UGC is not particularly geared to evaluating performance of
law teaching institutions. What is available to the public is an
India Today annual survey of the top ten law schools in the
country. This is an unsatisfactory state of affairs for the
future of legal education in India which will soon be called upon
to compete globally for quality, professionalism and
responsiveness to changing demands.
Directions for change
What are the expectations of the country and the people from law
and legal services in the coming years, given the process of
globalisation and transformation in the role of the state? What
is the best strategy to strengthen professional legal education
while promoting wider instruction in law as a liberal academic
discipline? If training in skills and ethics is to be
accomplished within the law school curriculum what is the
appropriate model to achieve this end? How does one assess the
social relevance and justice content of law teaching and what can
be done to maximise those goals? What ought to be the supervisory
and control mechanism to ensure accountability on the part of
professional schools of law in maintaining standards of teaching,
research and extension activities?
To be able to address these questions one must have an awareness
of the challenges involved and the changes taking place in
contemporary times. These relate to unmet legal needs of
different sections of society, delay and cost in accessing
justice, impact of globalisation on equality and human rights,
vast technological changes especially in information and
communication, the relative incapacitation of the state by market
domination and the role of professions in justice, peace and
development. In all these changes law and lawyers play a decisive
role of facilitation, moderation and control. Law without justice
is an empty shell. It is the nature of and access to institutions
and procedures which make justice possible. In structuring the
institutions and procedures, particularly in periods of
transition, lawyers will have to assist communities, interest
groups and governments keeping in mind the requirements of
equity, justice and fairness.
Additional roles
The conventional role of a lawyer is to step in after the event
to resolve disputes and dispense justice to the aggrieved party.
In the changed scenario, the additional roles envisaged are that
of policy planner, business advisor, negotiator among interest
groups, expert in articulation and communication of ideas,
mediator, lobbyist, law reformer, etc. These roles demand
specialised knowledge and skills not ordinarily available in the
existing profession. The five-year integrated programme of legal
education is a modest response to these challenges as perceived
in the 1980s well before the end of Cold War and advent of
market-oriented globalisation. The lawyer of tomorrow must be
comfortable to interact with other professions on an equal
footing and be able to consume scientific and technical
knowledge. In other words, along with social science subjects,
the law curriculum for the future must provide integrated
knowledge of a whole range of physical and natural science
subjects on which legal policies are now being formulated. These
areas include bio-diversity, bio-technology, information
technology, environmental sciences, air and space technologies,
ocean and marine sciences, forensic sciences, public health,
petroleum and minerals related subjects, etc. Lawyers will be
naturally called upon to specialise in assorted branches of legal
practice as it is impossible to be a practitioner on all emerging
areas of legal practice.
The image of a lawyer in society as well as the self-image of the
profession is not what it ought to have been given the diverse
roles as stipulated above. A change is needed and it is important
that the profession exists for the people and not the other way
round. The way the profession is organised today also requires
change to let a more rational distribution of work and to promote
standards of efficiency and accountability. The way a lawyer
thinks, acts and conducts himself will have to change if legal
services have to be a powerful tool for justice in an unequal
society/world. It is here legal education has to take its lesson
on value addition. Justice must become central to the law
curriculum and community-based learning must give the desired
value orientation in the making of a lawyer. To give a recent
example, one can say that the young law students who went to the
earthquake affected districts of Gujarat seeking to carry legal
services to the victims came back with impressions and
experiences which would no doubt influence their professional
life and shape their approach to justice. The idea being
canvassed here is that professional education will have to be
imbued with a spirit of social service and there is no better way
of inculcating it except to expose them while studying law to
real life experiences crying out for justice. The politics of
legal education and the economics of legal practice should be
subjected to academic scrutiny if the profession has to be saved
from the practitioners themselves!
N. R. MADHAVA MENON
Vice-Chancellor, W.B. National University of Juridical Sciences
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail
|
|
Section : Features Previous : The war, the U.N. and international law | |
|
Front Page |
National |
Southern States |
Other States |
International |
Opinion |
Business |
Sport |
Miscellaneous |
Features |
Classifieds |
Employment |
Index |
Home | |
|
Copyright © 2001 The Hindu Republication or redissemination of the contents of this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of The Hindu |
|