The Bar Council of India (BCI) on Saturday determined to permit members of Parliament and legislative assemblies to practise as advocates, however mentioned that those that transfer an impeachment movement towards any decide of the upper judiciary won’t be allowed to look earlier than that court docket.
BCI Chairman Manan Kumar Mishra, a senior advocate, mentioned that the choice was taken by the apex bar physique to stop the “misuse of powers” and “privileges” of a lawyer and never of a member of Parliament.
The difficulty of the alleged function of some lawyer-turned-politicians behind reported strikes to question judges by Parliament got here up earlier than the overall council assembly of the BCI on Saturday during which the council thought of a report of its sub-committee on whether or not members of Parliament and legislative assemblies needs to be allowed to practise as advocates.
“The BCI has come to a remaining conclusion that we can not cease or ban MPs from practising within the courts however there’s an exception to it. The lawyer-MPs or MLAs, if they begin any movement of impeachment or a elimination continuing towards any excessive court docket or Supreme Court docket decide, they won’t be allowed to practise in that individual court docket. This is almost all view of the council,” Mishra informed a press convention right here.
The apex court docket had on March 12 sought the response of the BCI on a plea filed by Delhi BJP spokesperson Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay, looking for a ban on lawmakers from practising as advocates.
Mishra mentioned the council took the choice after contemplating the reply given by three of its members — senior advocates Kapil Sibal, Vivek Tankha and A M Singhvi, who’re Rajya Sabha members.
“After contemplating their replies and the report of the committee, together with the report of our co-chairman S Prabhakaran, who has dissented from the bulk view, the BCI has come to a remaining conclusion that we can not cease or ban MPs from practising within the courts however there’s an exception to it. If the lawyer-MPs begin any movement of impeachment or a elimination continuing towards any excessive court docket or Supreme Court docket decide, they won’t be allowed to practise in that court docket. This is almost all view of the council,” he mentioned.
Requested in regards to the privilege of members of Parliament to maneuver impeachment movement, the BCI chairman mentioned that the lawyer-MPs have their privilege as parliamentarians, however “as legal professionals, the BCI can put the situation below which they are often allowed to practise or not”.
“Our Parliament is supreme. The members have their privilege. We can not make any touch upon their privileges. However as legal professionals, we will put the situation below which they are often allowed to practise or not.
“With a view to forestall the misuse of the powers and privileges of a lawyer, not of an MP, we now have put this situation that if any lawyer-MP begins any impeachment movement or participates within the impeachment movement, he can not practise in that court docket,” he mentioned.
In February, the committee had advisable that MPs, MLAs and MLCs may very well be allowed to pursue authorized observe, regardless of getting elected as legislators, topic to sure circumstances.
A number of advocates of the Congress and different opposition events have been reportedly making efforts to convey an impeachment movement in Parliament towards Chief Justice of India Dipak Misra within the alleged medical rip-off case.
With regard to the controversy over Justice Jasti Chelameswar’s latest letter to the CJI over alleged authorities interference within the judiciary, Mishra mentioned that it was a communication between the apex court docket decide and the chief justice of India and the BCI has no function to play in it.
“We got here to know in regards to the letter by media reviews. The letter was despatched to the chief justice. The Bar Council of India has no function in it,” he mentioned.
The highest court docket has mounted the PIL of Upadhyay for additional listening to on April 23.
The petition has mentioned that whereas a public servant can not practise as an advocate, legislators are practising in varied courts which is a violation of Article 14 of the Structure (equality earlier than regulation).
It has additionally mentioned that MPs have the ability of voting on impeachment of judges of the Supreme Court docket and the excessive courts.
“Subsequently, permitting them to practise as an advocate within the Supreme Court docket and the excessive courts is a really critical ‘battle of curiosity’ as a result of it could enable the judges to really feel beholden to them and to oblige them,” in keeping with the petition.