'Advocates Bound To Accept Any Brief; Unfair To Target Them For The Clients They Represent' : P&H Bar Council

A lawyers' s relationship with the brief/client is only to the extent representing such interest in courts and should not be construed as having personal relationships with the clients. Thus, targeting lawyers for the clients they represent was unfair and such attacks by the media were sponsored and synchronized.

It further states that the duty of a lawyer was to ensure that the constitutional principles of equal access to justice and rule of law provided under Articles 14, 22(1), and 39A are adhered to despite the feelings of the public for that particular litigant. Attention was also drawn to the bar council rules which clearly provide that "An Advocate is bound to accept any brief in the Courts and only under special circumstances his refusal is justified." The rules further state that

"It shall be the duty of an advocate to fearlessly uphold the interests of his client by all fair and honorable means without regard to any unpleasant consequences to himself or any other- regardless of his personal opinion as to the guilt of the accused, bearing in mind that his loyalty is to the law".

Citing examples of lawyers having represented even international Nazi-German war criminals at the Nuremberg trials, the council states that history is replete with instances of distinguished services by lawyers who have represented unpopular clients and causes. Just like a doctor had a duty to treat patients to the best of his abilities and accept every patient irrespective of his caste, creed, religion, character, misdoings etc, a layer was also duty bound to accept every client aiming to protect the physical, moral and intellectual integrity of the individual to the best of his/her abilities.

The Council also called upon the Central and State law enforcement agencies to deal with these attacks on lawyers more effectively. The government was expected to create a secure environment for the lawyers to function fearlessly without doubting that they would be publicly ridiculed for the act and conduct of their clients.

The court thus issued the advisory to all those concerned and also reserved the right to initiate legal recourse in case of violation.