Table of Contents
BCI’s ban on advertising, soliciting litigation work sparks debate among lawyers
Legal professionals weigh in on implications of bar council’s directive, balancing ethics with technological advancements and facing economic realities
The Bar Council of India (BCI), which regulates the legal profession in India, recently issued a directive banning lawyers from advertising and soliciting work through online platforms that connect them with litigants.
The decision has sparked a debate among legal professionals about the implications of the ban in the digital age, where many advocates have been using online platforms to reach a broader audience.
The BCI’s decision followed a July 3 judgment by the Madras High Court directing it to initiate disciplinary proceedings for misconduct against advocates advertising or soliciting work directly or indirectly. The court took an exception to websites like Quikr, Sulekha, and Justdial, providing online lawyer services on their platforms, allowing advocates to openly solicit legal work.
“…the websites have also independently provided rating services of lawyers without any basis or authority and the lawyers by enlisting themselves in such websites have brought down the nobility and dignity of the profession,” the High Court had remarked.
‘Economic reality’
Advocate Aditya Kashyap said while he appreciates the intent behind the BCI’s directive, the financial challenges faced by many lawyers cannot be ignored. “On the one hand, we say litigation is a noble profession; that it is a ‘calling’. But the harsh reality is that most of the lawyers, especially first-generation law graduates, are not even being paid the minimum wages for skilled labour”.
“One needs to think about these things while undertaking measures to regulate litigation as a profession,” he said.
Mr. Kashyap said there is a huge gap between the demand for legal services and the supply of competent lawyers, to overcome which, the adoption of technology is necessary. “Currently, a major chunk of referral mechanism is restricted to informal sources, and hence the problem of touts in courts prevail,” he said.
“Therefore, while legal marketplaces or directories, which help connect clients with lawyers, may be regulated within the boundaries of law, they should not be taken down or banned,” added Mr. Kashyap.
‘Ban paid promotion’
Advocate Rupendra Kumar Karn, who practises in the Delhi High Court and supports the BCI’s decision, said paid promotions must be prohibited. “This feature should be banned because people who can spend more will end up coming up first in the internet search results,” he argued. “After this directive, I had to get my information on ‘JustDial’ delisted. The annual cost to maintain the listing starts around ₹30,000. Others are spending ₹2-3 lakh per year to maintain similar listings on various platforms.”
Advocate Gyanant Kumar Singh emphasised the necessity of adapting to technological advancements while adhering to professional ethics. “The rules prohibit soliciting work,” he noted, “but basic information about lawyers on websites for academic purposes and pursuits should not be seen as soliciting.”
However, Mr. Singh draws a clear line when it comes to commercialising legal services online. “Having websites and apps offering legal services through online mode and advertising the same as a ‘one-time solution’ is problematic. You never know whether your lawyer is competent or not.”
He added, “I personally know of websites and apps that propose to give you legal solutions and charge a minimal amount. So, even when people get cheated, they don’t complain. But it maligns the profession. It maligns us.”
“I can have a portal or a website of my own for academic pursuits, but I cannot say that I am offering solutions. If I offer solutions for an amount and display it on the website or portal, I am soliciting work.”
‘Carry disclaimers’
Advocate Amit Sahni also supported the BCI’s decision. “The lawyers who were listing themselves on these online platforms must now remove themselves. And advocates maintaining their own websites must carry a disclaimer that they are not soliciting any work”.
Read Comments
- Copy link
- Telegram
READ LATER
Remove
SEE ALL
PRINT