The Advocates (Amendment) Bill, 2025, was introduced by the Indian government to reform the legal profession by amending the Advocates Act, 1961. Key proposals included expanding the definition of “legal practitioner” to encompass corporate lawyers and in-house counsels, mandating registration with local Bar Associations, prohibiting court boycotts and strikes, and allowing government-nominated members in the Bar Council of India (BCI). Additionally, the bill sought to enhance disciplinary measures and regulate foreign law firms operating in India.
The Advocates (Amendment) Bill, 2025 faced strong opposition from the Bar Council of India (BCI) and advocates due to several controversial provisions. The key issues raised were:
1. Government Interference in BCI
- The bill proposed allowing government-nominated members in the Bar Council of India (BCI) and State Bar Councils.
- Lawyers and the BCI argued that this would compromise the independence of the legal profession and violate the autonomy of the Bar Council.
2. Regulation of Foreign Law Firms
- The bill sought to give regulatory powers over foreign law firms to the government instead of the BCI.
- The legal fraternity opposed this move, arguing that such regulation should remain under the BCI’s authority, as per previous Supreme Court rulings.
3. Prohibition on Court Boycotts and Strikes
- The bill proposed strict penalties for advocates participating in court boycotts or strikes.
- Lawyers opposed this, arguing that it violates their right to protest against judicial or legal system issues.
4. Inclusion of Corporate Lawyers & In-House Counsels
- The bill expanded the definition of “advocate” to include corporate lawyers and in-house counsels, allowing them to register as legal practitioners.
- The BCI opposed this, arguing that only those who enroll with Bar Councils and practice in courts should be recognized as advocates.
5. Disciplinary Provisions & Control over Legal Education
- The bill strengthened disciplinary actions against advocates for professional misconduct, granting more power to the BCI and government.
- Lawyers feared increased control over their profession and potential misuse of disciplinary provisions.
- It also aimed to regulate legal education, which some felt could lead to government overreach.
6. Alleged Violation of Advocates’ Rights
- Many lawyers believed the bill curtailed their rights and favored government control over the legal profession, potentially weakening the independence of the judiciary.
Due to these concerns and nationwide protests by advocates, the Law Ministry withdrew the draft bill on February 22, 2025, stating that it would consult stakeholders before reintroducing a revised version.
Leave a Reply