Chennai: Pointing out that unruly eleents, non-practising advocates, candidates with criminal background are contesting Bar Council election using money power and in an endeavour to see that only advocates wedded to the profession with immense legal knowledge, integrity, moral values contest the election, the Madras high court has issued several directions, prescribing qualifications and disqualifications for candidates to contest the election to the Bar Council of Tamil Nadu and Puducherry (BCTP).
“The situation prevailing in the legal profession is very grim and it requires intensive care treatment failing which the profession itself will be lost to the criminal elements and non-practising advocates. It is an extraordinary situation that the justice delivery system depends upon lawyers who are the officers of court and consequently, if the Bar Council which controls the legal profession is occupied by persons with criminal background, definitely, it will play havoc with the justice delivery system. This court cannot be a mute spectator to the aforesaid extraordinary situation and therefore, appropriate directions are given, apart from the relief sought for in the petition”, said a division bench comprising Justices N. Kirubakaran and Justice R. Tharani.
The BCI is directed to consider and take a decision in the meeting to be held on February 18 with regard to election conduct and eligibility rules passed by the special committee, BCTP.
The BCI is directed to consider whether it is possible to appoint a few more retired judges of high court as observers along with Justice G.M. Akbar Ali, returning officer, and special committee members, so as to monitor the election effectively and to conduct the election without any problem as the contestants are stated to be distributing money, gifts and liquor to the voters, the bench added.
The bench said the returning officer is to accept the nomination of only those candidates (a) Who produce at least 10 reported judgments, 5 contested judgments for each year in the previous five years to the election year 2018 or 25 contested judgments in total, If they are high court practitioners, to prove their continuous practice and their contribution to the development of law. (b) Who produce at least 5 contested judgments for each year in the preceding five years to the election year 2018 or 25 contested judgments in total, if they are practicing before the subordinate courts, to prove their continuous practice and their contribution to the development of law, the bench added.
The other 11 directions issued by the Bench to the returning officer are similar to what the election commission mandates during legislators elections like MPs, MLAs and disqualify the candidates who are found to be using communal, religious, linguistic cards and indulging in money, gift, liquor distribution to woo the voters (advocates).
