The
first day of the National
Meet of Social Justice Lawyers saw a varied array of speakers addressing
young
lawyers gathered from across the country. Organized by Centre for Social
Justice in association with NCDHR, the panel included distinguished
persons
like Ms. Farah Naqvi, Member, National Advisory Council, Professor Babu
Matthew
from National Law University of Delhi, Ms. Vrinda Grover and Ms. Geeta
Ramaseshan to name a few. The opening speech was made by Mr. Gagan
Sethi, Vice
Chairperson of Centre for Social Justice, who spoke about Centre for
Social JusticeⳊjourney of engaging with lawyers. The Lawyers for Change
Program, the first
batch of which commenced in December, 2011, has been a dream of
GaganⳠand is
the first systematic effort of bringing young lawyers from across the
country
for social justice lawyering. Ms. Farah Naqvi from the National Advisory
Council, who made the inaugural speech, also spoke powerfully about the
need
for an army of social justice lawyers both inside and outside the
courtroom.
Ms. Naqvi articulated the worry she faces in doing her work on changing
public
policy, because of the stream of new laws being passed by Parliament,
but the
abysmal lack of implementation of the laws that are already existing.
She urged
all the young lawyers in the audience to challenge the system through
their
lawyering, and appealed to them above all, to humanize the legal system,
and
dignify every victim who approaches them.༯font>
Professor Babu Matthew made the
keynote address next, congratulating Mr. Gagan Sethi for creating a space for
young law graduates to do this kind of work. Using the labour law sector as an
example, Prof Matthew directed attention to the unique, old model of
development existing in India, which was rights-based, and which was destroyed
with the advent of neo-libralism. According to him, in order to advance in the
field of social justice lawyering, we will have to return to the old model of
development. He ended by emphasizing the importance of a community such as
Lawyers for Change in this journey.༯span>
Mr. Tridip Pais, an advocate from New
Delhi, spoke on the topic of 㓥nsitive Lawyering Integrating response to
human rights within mainstream practice䮠Mr. Pais began by explaining how he
devoted 75% of his time to mainstream cases and 25% to what he broadly
categorized as 㦲ee cases䮠The latter falls within the ambit of social action
litigation. He talked of the need for every independent legal practitioner to
balance paid-for and free cases, since one needs to earn a livelihood too, and
can in this way exercise a choice of which cases to pick, not governed by any
mandate. In his opinion, a lawyer has a responsibility, in his free cases, to
represent clients who donⴠhave the option of another lawyer. Also, handling
all kinds of matters helps a lawyer gain a mainstream experience and maintain a
level of professionalism, even in his free cases.༯span>
Maneka Guruswamy, a young
advocate who practises in the Supreme Court and followed Mr. Pais, echoed the
importance of having a mixed practice. In her opinion, it enabled lawyers to
have access to a decent standard of living as well as do interesting work and
simultaneously make a difference. Maneka expressed the importance of bringing
craft and quality lawyering to the courtroom, as well as maintaining a level of
professional detachment. She works mainly in the area of constitutional law and
referred to three important cases from 2011, including the Naz Foundation and
the RTE judgment. She also voiced her concern about the extraordinary gap
between the world of legal scholarship reading, writing and critical thinking
and actual legal practice, and the need to bridge the same.༯span>
Post-lunch, the
session was taken by Ms. Geeta Ramaseshan, Senior Lawyer, Madras High Court on
ㅸperiences from the Civil Liberty Movement.䠍s. Ramaseshan, who completes 30
years at the bar next month, talked about her experiences within the Legal Aid
Movement in Tamil Nadu in the 1980s. She narrated a very inspiring story from
her junior lawyer days, about reading a newspaper advertisement by Sikhs
appealing for help in Coimbatore, in the aftermath of the 1984 Sikh riots and
then making a trip to visit them. This resulted in a Public Interest
Litigation, one of the first in India on state inaction, and from this further
developed the jurisprudence of culpable inaction in India. She also spoke about
the different kinds of strategies they would use on behalf of victims of
oppression in order to get them justice. Coming to Public Interest Litigations,
with reference to abuse of power, Ms. Ramaseshan stated how she found them to
be very risky. This is because with the dismissal of the case, the court washes
its hands off it, making the political process around it much more challenging.
So PILs are a tool to be used very cautiously and as a last resort, in her
opinion. She mentioned, also, her misgivings about the use of media for
litigation. She ended by asking the young lawyers present to rise to the
occasion and practice social justice lawyering as well as regular lawyering,
and build a constant repository of knowledge in the process.༯span>
The penultimate
speaker of the day was Ms. Vrinda Grover, a Human Rights Advocate from New
Delhi. Ms. Grover talked about the inextricable linkage of law with politics,
and her experiences regarding communal violence and Kashmir. She also stressed
on the need for every lawyer to work bottom-up, from the lower-most courts as
those were the actual arenas of human rights work. However, lawyering in her
opinion needs to be done both within the courtroom and outside it, and research
and writing are as important an aspect of human rights lawyering as practice.
Moving on to ethics, Ms. Grover expressed her problem with the second-rate
lawyering done in free cases of public interest, and the express accountability
of lawyers to each and every client they represent. For her, the challenge lies
in not letting the system exhaust you, and she ended by revealing that the
source of her grit and determination did not stem from within but from the
people tirelessly fighting their cases for years, who believe that the actual
win is the fight itself and not a favourable judgment.༯span>
The last session was on
Dalit Rights and was taken by Mr. Prasad Sirivella and Mr. Paul Divakar from
NCDHR. Mr. Sirivella presented a statistical analysis of atrocities taking
place on Dalits across the country, and how they are affected not only by
non-implemention of the SC/ST Prevention of Atrocities Act but also by other
social welfare legislations. Mr. Divakar, apart from caste-based violence,
spoke about gender-based violence and drew parallels between the two. He
concluded by speaking about the transformation taking place within the legal
system, and the hope for better legislations and implementation in the future.
Please find attached the event schedule.
For queries regarding coverage, please contact Ms. Azima on 099099 63357
--
Satyajeet Mazumdar
Centre for Social Justice
Mobile: (+91) 99099 63150
Website: www.centreforsocialjustice.net
Facebook: www.facebook.com/censocjust
More information on the event available here.
Comments
Post a Comment