Experts & Views
http://business.rediff.com/report/2010/jan/15/govt-proposes-test-for-budding-lawyers.htm#write
I have a mixed feeling. It definitely is a positive step of the Govt to choose Quality over quantity. However, it is pertinent that the govt also provides job opportunities and set up more courts with better facilities.
Its a good way to encourage competition and skim out the cream. However, I very strongly feel that , it should be a 2 way communication. For instance, let us have the salary revised for the quality lawyers and lets also have better courts and court facilities. Provide good, basic facilities to the quality lawyers to work proficiently and expeditiously like good internet connection and connected P.C in the courts.
The idea is, to encourage talented lawyers to channelise their energy for the betterment of the whole Indian legal system. Cutting out the quacks from the good ones doesn't actually solve the real problem that the Indian legal system faces today.
Hopefully, this ain't another red herring.
threads most popular
thread most upvoted
comment newest
first oldest
first
This test will improve the quality of lawyers, lessen the number of quacks at the courts and make our case for waiving the exam requirements stronger (even though personally speaking, arguing against the mandatory exams is stupid and altogether different since the exams there pertain to the local law in that jurisdiction and passing the Indian version of the Bar exam does not establish proficiency in their law.)
All the talk about improving quality of the bar by attracting national law school students would probably cease if this happens ... else eminent lawyers and judges can keep lamenting and using phrases like "nobody wants to join the Bar and they prefer being glorified clerks". Also, good lawyers from other law schools will also not be discriminated against once some bar exam score is there as a minimum benchmark. Many don't realize that national law school students can also be crap and local law school students can be brilliant.
[ i am from a national law school .... so please don;t fret and say i am biased this or biased that. and i work in a big law firm but i feel disgusted when i hear that X lawyer pays 5k to his juniors and the same lawyer talks about national law school students not joining lit ]
Ms Sindhu Yadav,
Subject Matter Expert,
Choir de Law Pvt. Ltd., Delhi
Job opportunities? To who? One hopes you meant rehabilitate them and not provide job opportunities. And obviously, this would apply prospectively.
And no, cutting out the quacks from the system IS a good thing. Please explain how it isn't. It does go a long way in solving the real problem. Not on its own, but it still is an essential ingredient in any legitimate plan to improve the quality of legal services. The abundance of quacks leads to issues becoming more convoluted, time consuming and leads to further litigation.
So yes, one reason for having the test is to serve that very purpose.
well, I never said cutting out the quacks is a bad thing, I said its not the only solution. Besides, a quack is a quack, no matter how many tests, or how many papers you make him take, he/ she will find a way to cheat or do something about it.
Infact, all these system of exams and papers are time wastage. I would rather suggest a one one one interview or interview by a panel of senior lawyers and judges etc as the interviewer. It is more interactive, and a quicker process. Also. there are many students I know, who are very well spoken and smart, yet they never manage to get good grades on the other hand, there are some who are not well spoken and are very quiet, yet they score very good grades. So, how do we balance them and come to zero sum?? Not another written test huh?
threads most popular
thread most upvoted
comment newest
first oldest
first