Pre-cum-Mains GS Foundation Program for UPSC 2026 | Starting from 14th Nov. 2024 Click Here for more information
BCI mulls ban on practice by law makers
What has happened?
An expert committee of the Bar Council of India is considering a plea to ban lawmakers — Members of Parliament and Members of the Assemblies — from doubling up as practising advocates, saying they are salaried public servants and cannot ride two horses at the same time
Advocates act
The three-member panel is examining the provisions of the Advocates Act and the Bar Council of India Rules in this respect. They will file their report in the next few days
Members of the panel
The panel is composed of top BCI — the country’s topmost lawyers’ body — office bearers and advocates B.C. Thakur, R.G. Shah and D.P. Dhal
Petition
The petition filed by Supreme Court advocate Ashwini Upadhyay contended that MPs and MLAs draw their salaries from the Consolidated Fund of India, hence, are “employees of the state”. Petition further contended that,
- It amounted to “professional misconduct” that MLAs and MPs, who get salary and other benefits from the public fund, appear against the government. Some of these lawmakers even hold corporate retainer-ships. They appear against the State to defend their lawbreaker clients in the Court of Law, which is the matter of conflict of interest
- While an advocate should be fully dedicated to his profession, legislators are also expected “to dedicate their fulltime to public and their constituents ahead of their personal and financial interests
- It is impossible for a person to perform two fulltime duties at a time. Therefore, MLAs and MPs must be barred from practicing as an advocate
Legal provisions
- The BCI Rule 49 restricts a salaried employee from practising as an advocate, the petition said. Many senior advocates practising in the Supreme Court are also party politicians and sitting MPs
- Under Section 21 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 2(c) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, MLAs and MPs are public servants. Hence, allowing them to practice, as an advocate and restricting other public servants is arbitrary, irrational and violation of Articles 14-15 of the Constitution
