We want LI to be one of the friendliest places on the internet, where lawyers and law students help each other with their career related queries and occasionally discuss other stuff that might affect their lives too. In other words:
1. Be kind, respectful and helpful to each other.
2. Be bona fide, truthful, genuine and curious.
3. Assume the best intention of others.
Therefore, in using the site, you must agree to do your best to uphold these community guidelines.
Note that what you find here is written and moderated by anonymous people on the internet.
Therefore everything you read here is very likely unverified, rumour, speculation and/or downright false.
In continuing to read anything here, you must therefore agree not to take anything you read here as factual and that you will exercise due caution, diligence and common sense before acting on any information you may come across here.
You also agree to report any inaccurate or malicious comments with the buttons. Moderators take action within 24 hours, as required and appropriate under law.
Our full terms and conditions apply too.
Do you solemnly agree to all of the above?
but anything that undermines their merit will be counterproductive as we will be producing a talentless generation of underprivileged kids.
most from these backgrounds in top law schools are better off urban teenagers.
it should be on financial backwardness even muslim girls i can understand. not wealthy sc males for sure.
I do agree that it’s awful that Savarna students dominate moots, debates and quizzes. I think what these committees should do is dedicate a huge percentage of their resources ( which they get because ALL students pay into the fund) to helping dalit and Bahujan and adivasi students catch up. Hire language tutors, hire mooting /debating coaches, hire support staff - conduct outreach programmes. They should do this because having a larger competitive pool will only make the mooting, debating, quizzing culture stronger. I don’t think first year students should be sent out of the university to moot or debate. I think we should use the first year to train all the first year students and do selections the second year onwards. When at least some of the drawbacks from different access to schooling and English has been over come.
1. It's a shame that - you marked the post as trollish. Which shows that you are a low key UC Savarna.
2. Publish all comments - and expose casteism and misogyny within legal community. Show the comments don't censor it.
R plz publish this comment, it's not a hate comment, it's the reality, people just want privileges just in the name of weaker section status which is totally wrong and promotes reverse discrimination.
Like a handicap in Golf, a person from the weaker section should start with 5% of the total score.
The moot organisers could also provide them with additional resources, such as Manupatra Access (Jessup used to do this for everyone though, not sure if they still do), free printing facilities (printing for moots used to cost us an arm and a leg in college) and maybe a 3-5 day extension on Memorial submission deadlines.
Not all forms of affirmative action is reservation you know?
Truly oozing class (sorry caste), or should I say salt...
To make moots more equitable - competitions must reserve atleast 50% moot seats for Bahujans. And give extra marks for everyone from Religious Minority/Reserved Categories.
This will make sure that moot court competitions are inclusive and equitable for all.
This should be proposed across the Academia.