Justice F.M. Ibrahim Kalifulla, a Supreme Court judge, on Saturday appealed to advocates not to resort to strike or court boycott.
Court boycott is “a black spot that tarnishes our image,” he said after declaring open a modern building for the Bar Council of Tamil Nadu and Puducherry, constructed here at a cost of Rs. 3 crore.
“Boycotts are not liked by anyone. It should never happen. There is always an alternative to strikes. The Bar Council could set up a committee that would work with the judges to resolve any problem,” he said.
Detailing the responsibilities of a Bar Council, he said the body, tasked with maintaining standards in law education, should prevent unscrupulous elements from entering the profession. Once a law graduate enrolled himself, the council should see that the new entrant got a foothold in the institution. A scheme should be drawn up for the Bar and the High Court to sponsor young advocates to associate themselves as law clerks with senior lawyers. He suggested institution of awards for young lawyers and introduction of medical aid and pension schemes for lawyers.
Referring to the delay in the disposal of cases, Justice C. Nagappan, another Supreme Court judge, said the courts and the judges were not responsible for the problem. Several pieces of legislation had been introduced, and it was hard even for the advocates and the judges to keep track of them. At times, there was a criticism that legislation was ill-drafted. The effectiveness of the Bar Council in performing its duties determined the strength and quality of the justice delivery system, he said.
The Chief Justice of the Madras High Court, S.K. Kaul, called for improving the standards of law education. Eminent lawyers should compensate the paucity of good teachers. Besides providing continuing education, the Bar Council should verify the facilities in law institutions.
Justice R. Banumathi, a Supreme Court judge, said ethics was the most important aspect of the profession for lawyers. However, she suggested that Bar Councils take a liberal view in the cases of minor violations by advocates.
