In recent times, Bar Councils have taken stringent steps to improve the standard of both legal education and the legal profession. The introduction of Bar Vocational Courses, the revamp of the LLB curriculum, and mandatory screening tests before and after LLB (i.e., LAT and GAT) are undoubtedly steps in the right direction. The Punjab Bar Council went a little further in this regard. It mandated that the degrees be verified by the Higher Education Commission to be eligible for a license. Fair enough. To practice as an advocate, one must have a verified qualification that enables him to practice law. All these steps converge on a single goal: tighten entry into the profession so that only verified and (maybe) competent advocates are admitted. However, what shall happen to those who, after overcoming all these hurdles, manage to enter the profession? There is no clear answer. To remove the sugar-coating, there is no answer at all.
Regulatory bodies are more prone to regulating entry into the profession rather than striking at the heart of the problem, i.e., financial survival, as a result of which some young lawyers are forced to find not-so-great ways to earn their livelihood. Accepting a case for a meagre fee (sometimes forced pro bono), filing frivolous petitions/applications, touting, and doing menial tasks that even a clerk would hesitate to do are some of the few ways young lawyers adopt to ensure their financial survival.
Yet, no one seems willing to address the elephant in the ‘bar’. The question remains: how do we ensure that young (first-gen) lawyers survive and thrive financially rather than abandon the profession after a few years due to economic pressures? There have been some voices for a stipend for young lawyers in recent years; but sadly, the voices have not yet been materialized.
After completing 5 years of LL.B (now four), a typical path for a young lawyer is to join a senior advocate and assist him in his cases while building up his own knowledge base and legal acumen. If you get lucky, you may find your senior as your mentor in the legal field. However, some seniors treat young lawyers as little more than clerks, assigning them tasks such as transporting files between chambers and courts. In worse situations, you may not even be permitted to read the case files, as it may endanger their own standing by seeing you as competition. Bear in mind, the question of remuneration is not even raised at this stage. You are expected to magically cover your fuel and survival costs, even though you are not receiving a single penny from your senior for your assistance rendered in his matters. I concur with the notion that learning precedes earning; but we have to take into account the fact that not everyone is privileged enough to sustain the first few years of practice on family support.
What, then, is the way forward? What should be the policy of the regulators to safeguard that the profession does not become reserved only for the children of lawyers and judges? The concepts of training contracts and articling may provide a solution to this. In the UK, paid training contracts are executed by law firms for usually two years. In these two years, the trainee works as a paid employee, gains substantial work experience, and thus adds value to the firm. Moreover, in Canada, there is a paid articling term of 8-10 months under the supervision of a lawyer or judge.
The question, however, is how such a system could be implemented in Pakistan. In my view, District and Tehsil Bar Associations shall maintain a record of firms practicing within their jurisdiction and categorize them into Tier 1, Tier 2, and Tier 3 Firms. The firms shall make a requisition to the association for associates as and when needed, along with their requirements and remuneration budget. Bar associations shall conduct a subjective scenario-based test (unlike GAT) quarterly in a year, testing young lawyers on key subjects of law like the Civil Procedure Code, Criminal Procedure Code, Qanoon-e-Shahadat, Pakistan Penal Code, and Specific Relief Act etc. The successful candidates shall be placed according to their merit position in the respective firms. Those candidates who passed the test but could not secure a placement shall be placed on the waiting list, to be appointed when there is a vacancy. Bar associations shall ensure that the successfully placed candidates get paid training contracts of at least two years. This would address the long-standing concern of firms that the time and effort invested in training an associate goes to waste when the associate leaves after only six months without contributing any meaningful value to the firm. Moreover, it also protects the young lawyers from exploitation of unpaid work in their nascent years of practice.
It is high time for Bar Councils and Bar Associations to move beyond their traditional roles as mere regulators and take active steps to ensure that litigation remains a financially viable and accessible option for individuals from non-legal backgrounds. It is apprehended that if robust measures are not taken today, law may literally become the profession reserved only for lords or the children of lord(ships) in the years to come.