Senior advocates in the SC

GS Paper 2

 Syllabus: Structure, organisation and Functioning of the Judiciary

 Source: IE

Context: The SC has published new guidelines for the designation of senior advocates practising mainly in the Apex Court.

Background: The new guidelines come after the SC’s ruling seeking modification in the guidelines issued by the SC (in 2018) aftermath of its Indira Jaisingh ruling (2017).

How were advocates designated before the 2017 ruling?

• The Advocates Act 1961 states two classes of advocates – senior advocates and other advocates.
• A senior advocate must be a deserving candidate [ by virtue of his ability, standing at the Bar, or special knowledge or experience in law] in the opinion of the SC or an HC].
• It was the Chief Justice and the judges who designates an advocate as a ‘senior’ advocate.

What did the court decide in the Indira Jaising case?

• Indira Jaising (India’s first woman Senior Advocate) challenged the existing process as opaque, arbitrary and fraught with nepotism.
• The SC (in 2017) decided to lay down guidelines for itself and all HCs on the process of designating senior advocates.
• It decided the setting up of a permanent committee and a permanent secretariat.
• Permanent secretariat –
  • Is a body tasked with receiving and compiling all applications for designation.
  • Published the proposal for designation on the official website of the concerned court, inviting suggestions and views.
  • Forward these suggestions to the permanent committee for scrutiny.
• The committee then interview the candidate and made an overall evaluation based on a point system that gave marks for –
  • years of practice
  • pro-bono work undertaken
  • judgements
  • publications and
  • a personality test
• Once a candidate’s name was approved, it was forwarded to the Full Court to decide on the basis of the majority.
• The Full Court could also recall the designation of a senior advocate.
• The SC had acknowledged (in its 2017 ruling) that the guidelines are not exhaustive and left them open for consideration by this Court.

The Guidelines to Regulate the Conferment of Designation of Senior Advocates 2018:

• These were released to bring greater transparency to the designation process.
• The guidelines discouraged the system of voting by secret ballot, except in cases where it was unavoidable.
• A permanent committee was created and empowered with powers of conferment.
  • The CJI-chaired committee was to consist of two senior-most SC judges, the Attorney General of India, and a member of the Bar nominated by the chair and other members.
  • The Committee was to meet at least twice a year.
• The CJI or any other judge could recommend the name of an advocate for designation.
• Alternatively, advocates could submit their applications to the Permanent Secretariat.

Issues with the 2018 guidelines:

• The point-based system (which awarded 40% weightage to publications, personality and suitability) is subjective, ineffective and dilutes the esteem and dignity of the honour being conferred traditionally.
• The rampant circulation of bogus journals could be published by paying a nominal amount.
• Discontinuation of a secret ballot disincentivises the judges from expressing their views about the suitability of any candidate.

Insta Links:

Why does the Centre want to revisit the process for designating senior advocates at Supreme Court, High Courts?

Prelims Links: (UPSC 2022)