NEWSLINKS
US EDITION
COLUMNISTS
DIARY
SPECIALS
INTERVIEWS
CAPITAL BUZZ
REDIFF POLL
DEAR REDIFF
THE STATES
YEH HAI INDIA!
ELECTION 99
ELECTIONS
ARCHIVES

Search Rediff

TN lawyers burn Jethmalani's effigy

N Sathiya Moorthy in Madras

Lawyers in Madras burnt the effigy of Union Law Minister Ram Jethmalani on Monday, protesting his refusal to stop the enforcement of the amended Civil Procedure Code, which denies right to second appeal in civil cases, and also stipulates five-year renewable enrollment for the practitioners, among others.

Though it started off as a token boycott by courts across Tamil Nadu and Pondicherry last Monday, it is not expected to conclude before the national protest of lawyers on Thursday, February 24.

Lawyers today planned a human chain in Madras, followed by a procession to the Raj Bhavan on Thursday, where they propose to present a memorandum to Governor Justice Fatima Beevi. In between, they have sought the intervention of the DMK state government to influence the coalition partners of the National Democratic Alliance at the Centre to withdraw the amended CPC.

The amended CPC does not allow appeals from the district courts to lie in the respective high courts but only in the Supreme Court. Likewise, appeals against the verdicts of district munisiff courts will not lie in the district and sessions courts, but only in the high court, where too, a second appeal through a division bench will be denied, in favour of an appeal in the Supreme Court.

"It will make things that much more difficult the litigants who cannot afford to go all the way to New Delhi to appeal against the orders of a district and sessions judge," says a Madras-based lawyer.

"If the law-makers intended to speed up the judicial process, it would be served by default, since most litigants cannot afford costly appeals in the Supreme Court," he said.

In the early stages, however, the striking lawyers' were more worried that the amended CPC demanded that they pass qualifying exams every five years after which they are to be registered afresh. They also raised slogans against the Centre's plans to permit lawyers from other countries to practise in India, when no reciprocal facility was available.

But there was no public support coming and, instead, snide remarks were made that they ought to be made to pass exams not every five years but every year. Seeing how things stood, the lawyers shifted focus to the litigants' plight. But here too lawyers have something to lose: if second appeals are denied there will be fewer cases for them to fight, says a retired high court judge.

Madras Bar Association president P Jayaraman has unequivocally demanded the withdrawal of the CPC Amendment Act, and has been attacking the Centre no end, realising that this is one battle lawyers could lose. Lawyers here note with concern that it is only in Tamil Nadu that their agitation has really gained momentum.

One lawyer said they were already being criticised for talking about litigants' rights while adding to their hardships by boycotting the courts.

But he too stressed that "the denial of second appeal, in the absence of a Supreme Court bench in each state, would defeat the very purpose for which law and legal societies have been made."

But Union Law Minister Ram Jethmalani wasn't interested in their appeal, telling journalists that the Centre had no plans to withdraw the amended CPC as it stood.

"If there is anyone who should be concerned about the new law, it is only the poor litigants, for whom civil cases, at present, drag on for 10 to 15 years," he had said.

But Tamil Nadu Law Minister Aaladi Aruna, whom the striking lawyers have met twice in three days, has expressed conditional sympathy in their cause.

"There are 'certain issues' where they have a good case," he told journalists on Saturday. He later said he was willing to take up their case with the centre if Chief Minister M Karunanidhi was willing.

But the lawyers have backing from Vaiko, general secretary of the Marumalarchi Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam, a constituent of the NDA. Vaiko has already written to Prime Minister A B Vajpayee, arguing the lawyers' case. So has Dr S Ramadoss, leader of the Pattali Makkal Katchi, another NDA constituent.

However, one section of the lawyers is arguing against the strike, if only in the media. They say that the amended CPC provides for documentary proceedings through most of a trial, thus saving time. It also moots alternative mechanisms, like court-appointed commissioners to record evidence and even to dispose select cases.

"To that extent, this is a genuine attempt to cut down cost and time for the litigant," says a lawyer. What more, the litigants can file appeals in the trial courts, which are closer home. The litigant's case would still be heard only by the appellate court, he said, adding that this should remove the sting from the denial of a second appeal. He also pointed out the heavy penalties proposed for litigants causing avoidable delays by taking shelter under existing rules.

Many lawyers are likely to be affected by this measure, since the sanctions granted to private law colleges in the last three decades have increased their numbers enormously.

With the Centre refusing to budge and the lawyers divided on the matter, the strikers realise that ignominious capitulation may be inevitable and that the supply of lawyers could soon far exceed the demand.

Back to top

Tell us what you think of this report