THE DAMN DRACONIAN RULE

by Mohanavadivelan S , July 02, 2016

-----------------------------------------

There had not been a single occasion in Madras High Court Where a retiring judge amidst encomia and running emotions overwhelmingly without feeling hard for the co-operation of the Bench and the Bar. These passing remarks committed to memory by the said judge would have had a desired effect overtaking the advocates community and the hatred and any ill feelings accumulated thus far, had an occasion to perish in such situations. Now it seems the situation is not existing any more. Thanks to the confrontational approach of the Bench, particularly the Chief justice. This time tested culture slowly but steadily caved in and a sense of enmity and cut throat culture crept in the bench, while the bar with their brilliant elected representatives cutting the coat according to the cloth benefited greatly unmindful of the welfare of the advocates who elected them. The present stand of the president of the madras High Court Advocates’ Association endorses the same .Eventually the unprecedented number of suspension of advocates, the partition of the second largest court complex in Chennai, and the present imperialistic draconian Rules framed under sec.34(1) of the Advocates Act, leading to the on going agitation .Now there is an impasse as advocates boycott all the courts throughout tamilnadu. What exactly the problem between the bench and the bar at Madras High Court and does it anything to do with improving the administration of justice, the dispensation of justice, clearing the back log of the cases, improving the quality of legal studies or at least improving the living conditions of the enormous sections of lawyers who are still unable to make both ends meet. Nothing of that sort could be said about it. Looking it up from the zero point, it is one of scoring a point over to be one up, though sailing in the same boat for both bench and the Bar. Everything started with the Helmet rule. An administrative work precisely it is, sought to be overseen by the High Court of madras as if it has no other work and a section of advocates opposed it. Later a section of the advocates raked up another issue---making Tamil the official language of the courts---which was long forgotten by the society itself. During the course of such agitation it was indeed wrong of the said advocates to picket the chamber of the Chief justice of the madras High Court. In the backdrop of such incidents in and out of it, the Madras High Court was prompted to amend the High Court Rules under section 34(1)of the Advocates Act in such a way that judges at every level are empowered to deal with the unruly advocates, assuming power to even debar them in certain situations, which according to lawyers are against the law and the true letter and spirit of the decision of the Supreme court made in V.C. Mishra ‘s case(Supreme court Bar Association Vs Union of india),in which it was held that only the bar council can debar lawyers, not courts. These High Court Rules, made under sec.34(1) of the Advocates Act are alleged by them to be Draconian in nature

The demand of the agitating advocates is total and unconditional withdrawal of the said draconian amendments whereas the High Court of Madras would state that they could only be kept in abeyance sans implementation and the agitation of the advocates should be withdrawn at once. The advocates are not definitely going to succumb and accede to the demand of the High Court of Madras to withdraw the agitation it seems at least for now, though half a loaf could be better than none. The Hon’ble Chief Justice of the Madras High Court proved to be a good administrator, as he was able to silence both the Bar Council of Tamilnadu and Madras High Courts Advocates’ Association and remained indomitable even when nearly fifty advocates were suspended flouting the Rules of natural justice, till these amendments were carried out inside the span of the summer vacation. The silence of the advocates in tamilnadu was mistaken for subduing and the recent amendments have proved to be His last straw. The solution to this deadlock is in the simultaneous withdrawal of both the amended Rules by the Hon’ble High Court of Madras and the boycott by the Learned Advocates. The humble submission to the Hon’ble Chief Justice of Madras High Court would be instead of opening the eyes widely, open up please.

As a matter of fact except for the young and inexperienced advocates like me 22 years back, the boycott of courts is not their cup of tea. They knew the pros and cons of the same and have the experience of what it achieved in the past. It did not achieve anything against the system except a few isolated incidents against individuals like police excesses in some cases. They are just a hair of the dog. The system and the people at the helm that never bothered about the livelihood of so many advocates who were suspended without even being heard, will not be bothering about the loss of earning to the practicing advocates due to boycott of courts. Already this agitation looks like a sheep that have no shepherd and many advocates are lacking wherewithal to carry the fight forward in terms of money are certainly suggesting bleak future. Unless, we the advocates get rid of this obsolescent way of struggle, namely the boycott of courts, the whole agitation itself will lose it’s sheen. I am not averse to the very idea of agitating against the tyranny but the methods should be more meaningful, capable of uniting all brethren advocates with no burden on their earning source. A mere wearing of black ribbon on the chest by every advocate, though it looks like obsolete, would be sufficient enough to show our strength rather than a weak boycott call making the advocates stealthily appearing before the courts or encouraging their clients to represent their case guiding them from outside. They are not wrong indeed, instead they are perfectly right within the purview of law and preventing them would only be illegal.

LET US NOT DRAW A BLANK