In Bangladesh, junior lawyers encounter a lot of critical challenges during their early career. Economic exploitation stands out as the most significant issue among them all. Even after being enrolled as an advocate, junior lawyers often economically exploited by their senior lawyers in the absence of any effective law or rules regarding the fees or remuneration for their service. Furthermore, there is no regulation to have a unified pay scale or stipend for lawyers serving in firms. In such scenarios, law students having the option to choose from other professions, leaves the filed of advocacy with despair and shattered dreams.
In this scenario the recent decision of the Madraj High Court can be a light bearer as well as a guideline to reduce the sufferings of the junior lawyers in Bangladesh. In the judgment of the case Farida Begam vs. Puducherry Government (dated on 12 June 2024), the division bench of S.M. Subramaniam and C. Kumarappan, JJ directed the Bar Council of Tamil Nadu and Puducherry, the Government of Puducherry, and recognized associations to coordinate and approve a proposal to increase the amount of the Welfare Fund Scheme proposed by the Trust Committee and a minimum stipend of Rs. 20,000/-per month for advocates practicing in the major cities of Chennai, Coimbatore, and Madurai, and Rs. 15,000/-per month for advocates practicing in other areas of Tamil Nadu and Puducherry to be fixed. The Court highlighted the necessity of safeguarding the livelihood of junior advocates coming from marginalized and rural areas to practice law, and emphasized that safeguarding the rights, privileges, and interest of advocates is one of the functions of the Bar Council, as well as it is duty-bound to ensure the welfare and protection of livelihood of the junior lawyers.
In Bangladesh, the principle regulatory frameworks for conducting advocates and their rights and duties are The Bangladesh Legal Practitioner’s and Bar Council Order, 1972 (President’s Order No. 46 of 1972) and The Legal Practitioners (Fees) Act, 1926. Both of these statutes are completely silent in providing any solution in regards the stipend of junior lawyers. Rather, the system altogether creates a burdening situation, where based on locality, the enrolling junior lawyer needs to pay quite a hefty sum of fee to get membership in the local Bar Association. While, a general advice of being courteous and helpful towards junior lawyers by the seniors has been made in the rule 10, Chapter I (CANONS OF PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT AND ETIQUETTE) of The Bangladesh Legal Practitioner’s and Bar Council Order, 1972 (President’s Order No. 46 of 1972), no safeguarding mechanism against economic exploitation by senior lawyers against their junior were mentioned. Again, section 15 of this Order, mentions that the Bar Council may dispense the fund collected from the enrollment fees and other sources as relief fund as they seem fit without providing for any structured disbursement process. The Bar Council is allowed to collect fees from unemployed lawyers who in most cases does not even have a stable line of income. Being in an independent profession, the junior lawyers also fail to claim any right to get paid under the existing labor or employment laws as well. The Legal Practitioners (Fees) Act, 1926 in this regard, again fails to provide any systematic approach or safeguard to the livelihood of the junior lawyers.
Bangladesh as of constitutional footing stands as a welfare state safeguarding the rights of all citizens, but in terms of reality, even though a junior lawyer has the right to choose this profession out of free will, eventually leaves this profession out of no choices, as the stipend suffering for the first-generation newbies in the field is far beyond explanation. Even though, several news media houses covered this agonizing aspect of the junior legal practitioners, no robust legal mechanism was introduced by the Bangladesh Bar Council to mitigate this issue till this date. Rather many senior advocates consider this misery as an acceptable part of the journey of legal profession in Bangladesh. For these reasons many talented law graduates feels reluctant to pursue advocacy as a career.
Considering the socioeconomic condition of junior lawyers in Bangladesh, judicial transplantation of the direction made in Farida Begam vs. Puducherry Government needs to take place by the Supreme Court of Bangladesh in a suo motu rule to change the fate of many upcoming legal minds in the field of legal practices. A fixed stipend framework for junior lawyers can create a healthy economic environment in the legal profession of Bangladesh. Ministry of Law, Justice and Parliamentary Affairs must create a regulatory and monitoring mechanism to observe the execution of fixed stipend framework for junior lawyers in every Bar Association effectively. To be exact the author urges the fraternity to come with a more stable professional scope for the junior lawyers and legal practitioners, so that the law graduates can willfully take up this sacred role of soldiers of justice.
About the Authors
Nadia Islam Nody is a Lecturer in the Department of Law at the Bangladesh Army International University of Science and Technology (BAIUST) and a former Editor-in-Chief of NILS Bangladesh.
Shadab Bin Ashraf is a Lecturer in the Department of Law at the Bangladesh Army International University of Science and Technology (BAIUST) and an Advocate at the Dhaka District and Sessions Judge Court.