India's Lawyers Protest Modi Government Bid to 'Muzzle Them'

Amendments to Advocates Act an attempt to control the last dissenting voice, critics say

By: Mubashir Naik and Irshad Hussain

After tightening its grip on autonomous institutions like independent media houses and civil societies, the Modi-led government is now moving to control one of the last standing pillars of dissent in India, the legal fraternity, with amendments to the 1961 act that established the Bar Council of India and State Bar Councils to regulate the conduct of lawyers.

Lawyers and bar associations are staging protests against the proposed amendments across the country, calling them an unprecedented attack on the independence of the legal profession. As part of the protests, advocates have boycotted court proceedings.

The proposed amendments, among other things, would empower the government to nominate its own members to the Bar Council, robbing it of its autonomy, and would prohibit advocates and bar associations from initiating or participating in strikes or boycotts that disrupt court proceedings, with those found guilty facing criminal charges punishable by up to three years of imprisonment and immediate suspension..

Since 2014, when the Modi-led government came into power, authorities have increasingly cracked down against dissenting voices with dozens of journalists, human rights defenders and members of civil society booked by authorities. Many have been charged under its harsh anti-terror act, amended in 2019 to allow for stricter measures against individuals and organizations allegedly involved in unlawful activities.

Critics say national financial and investigation agencies have been weaponized against civil society, leading international rights organizations including Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch to accuse government officials, political leaders, and supporters of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) of advocating hatred and violence against religious minorities, particularly Muslims, with impunity.

On February 13, the Union Ministry of Law and Justice published proposed amendments to the 1961 Advocates Act, which established the Bar Council of India and State Bar Councils to regulate the conduct of lawyers. The proposed amendments have alarmed legal experts, who see them as a direct attempt to suppress independent lawyers and bring bar councils under government influence. If passed, opponents say, the changes could make it easier to target advocates who resist anti-public government policies, further shrinking the space for legal resistance.

The proposed amendments have sparked widespread protests and strikes by the legal fraternity across the country, with objections from the Bar Council of India, leading the government to withdraw the bill on February 22. However, it isn’t dead. The law and justice ministry has warned that the bill "will be processed afresh for consultation with stakeholders.”

The attempt to stiffen the law further comes at a time when lawyers defending activists, political prisoners, and marginalized communities are already facing intimidation through arrests, sedition charges, and disbarment. The government’s strategy of using laws to weaken institutions has been evident in its handling of the press, academia, and independent agencies, critics say. If enacted, the proposed changes could give the government greater control over bar councils and disciplinary proceedings against lawyers.

However, Supreme Court and Delhi high court-based lawyer Indira Unninayar said that the present government has the habit of saying the very opposite of what it means. “The notice preceding the draft bill for amending the Advocates Act, says the reforms aim to ‘create a just and equitable society,’ whereas unfortunately, the proposed amendments aim to do the very opposite,” she said in an interview.

“We have a dearth of infrastructure and judges; there is delay in appointments, often deliberately, by the central government,” she said. “Instead of working on these lacunae, this Government is trying to further weaken democratic processes and the justice dispensation system by targeting lawyers as well. Thankfully, lawyers have stopped the amendments from becoming a reality,”

Delhi High Court-based advocate Vivek Gaurav explained that advocates joined the legal profession because of India's independent judiciary. "If this independence is diluted or compromised, the legal profession would vanish," Gaurav stated.

Lawyers are often targeted on the streets, Gaurav said, with no protection for advocates or bar council members under the newly proposed amendments. "You can't justify it by saying lawyers are protesting. Protest is the right of everyone in a democracy. You have no right to intervene with the institution of the judiciary. We are united against this amendment."

In a press statement, the law ministry said that while the bill was made available for general public review, considering the number of suggestions and concerns raised, the ministry decided to conclude the consultation process.

Section 35A of the proposed amendments prohibits advocates and bar associations from initiating or participating in strikes or boycotts that disrupt court proceedings. Such actions would be deemed "indiscipline," effectively curbing lawyers' right to protest. Those found guilty would face criminal charges punishable by up to three years of imprisonment and immediate suspension from the rolls.

That provision is viewed as a direct attack on the independence of the profession. Another addition is a new definition of "misconduct," under which a lawyer’s actions causing damage, if proven, would result in a fine of up to Rs300,000 and additional legal expenses. However, if a complaint against a lawyer is found to be false, the complainant will only face a fine of Rs50,000.

To exert full control over the legal fraternity, the proposed act allows the central government to nominate up to three members to the Bar Council of India, in addition to existing members like the Attorney General and Solicitor General. The act does not specify whether these three members will be from the legal profession or the general public. This move has been perceived as a threat to the autonomy of the Bar Council of India, potentially transforming it from a self-regulatory body into one influenced by government-appointed members.

By granting the central government the authority to nominate members to the BCI, the government would gain direct control over bar councils and curtail the right of advocates to protest. According to Section 49B, the central government would also have the power to issue binding directives to the BCI. Advocates across the country view this as a direct attempt to silence dissenting lawyers, raising concerns that it could lead to undue influence, ultimately compromising the BCI's integrity.

In a letter to the Law Minister, BCI chairperson Manan Kumar Mishra wrote “It is shocking that in the draft publication, several material changes have been made by some officials and the Ministry of Law. The very concept of autonomy and independence of the Bar is attempted to be demolished by this draft. Lawyers throughout the country are agitated, strong protest is bound to occur. If such deliberate and draconian provisions are not omitted/amended immediately. The lawyers of Delhi district courts have already gone on strike and this protest is likely to spread throughout the country if no positive assurance from the ministry is made soon”.

Mubashir Naik (@sule_kaak) is an advocate and legal researcher based in Jammu and Kashmir. Irshad Hussain (@Irshad55hussain) is an independent journalist based in Jammu and Kashmir.