Advocates cannot practice journalism alongside legal practice: BCI to SC | India news

The Bar Council of India on Monday informed the Supreme Court that practicing advocates cannot work as journalists, whether on a full-time or part-time basis.

A bench of Justice Abhay S Oka and Justice Manmohan placed the BCI’s position on record citing Rule 49 of the BCI Rules.

“We have heard the learned counsel for the BCI who has submitted that as per the prescribed rules, an advocate cannot be allowed to do journalism either part-time or full-time. The petitioner has filed an affidavit stating that he will no longer work as a journalist and will only practice as a lawyer,” the bench said.
It states that the counsel for the petitioner has accepted the correctness of the stand taken by the BCI.

The BCI rules prohibit advocates from pursuing any other full-time profession, including journalism. The decision came in the context of a case filed by one Mohammad Kamran, who is reportedly a lawyer and freelance journalist.

Kamran later said that he did not work as a journalist and only practiced law.
In an affidavit filed on December 13, the BCI clarified that while full-time journalism is categorically unacceptable for advocates, part-time journalistic activities are also generally not permitted unless strictly connected with the legal profession.

The BCI introduced that part-time journalism may consist of scholarly articles, opinion pieces or editorials only.
Contributions that maintained a “meaningful relationship” with the legal profession. “(When it comes to) part-time journalism … the said professional activity will also be barred from the practice of law as an advocate,” it said.

Any journalistic engagement by a lawyer, the BCI said, must not interfere with their primary professional obligations, compromise the dignity and independence of the legal profession, or result in a dual professional arrangement. While Rule 51 of the BCI Rules provides some exemption for advocates to engage in journalism, the BCI said such activities should be limited to contributions directly related to legal practice and understanding.

After addressing the legal issues, the bench will hear the petition on February 3, 2025.
The petition challenges the Allahabad High Court’s order dismissing the criminal defamation proceedings against former MP Brijbhushan Sharan Singh.

The defamation case arose out of letters written by Singh to the UP Chief Minister and Chief Secretary in September 2022, accusing Kamran of being a “conspirator and thief” in various criminal cases. The letters were also circulated on social media and newspapers, asking Kamran to file defamation charges and reinstate proceedings against Singh.
Notably, Singh is facing a separate case of sexual harassment filed by six Indian wrestlers.

Why should you buy our membership?

You want to be the smartest in the room.

You want access to our award-winning journalism.

You don’t want to be confused and misinformed.

Choose your subscription package

Leave a Comment