Latest news with #2025Regulations
India Gazette
16 hours ago
- Business
- India Gazette
Bar Council stands by foreign law firm policy amid SILF resistance
New Delhi [India], June 19 (ANI): The Bar Council of India (BCI) has initiated a nationwide consultative process led by a high-level expert committee to review feedback on its amended Rules for Registration and Regulation of Foreign Lawyers and Foreign Law Firms in India, 2025. The move comes amid criticism from the Society of Indian Law Firms (SILF), which the BCI has accused of monopolising access to international legal work and misrepresenting the broader interests of the Indian legal community. The expert panel, chaired by eminent corporate lawyer Cyril Shroff, includes senior legal figures such as Ajay Bahl, Suhail Nathani, Sandip Bhagat, Mahesh Agarwal, and Amit Kapur. It has been tasked with collecting and incorporating stakeholder suggestions while reaffirming the BCI's commitment to fairness, accountability, and legal sovereignty. The Bar Council has invited written submissions from law firms, professionals, and the public within 15 days. The points of reference for the consultation are available on the official BCI website, according to the BCI statement issued on Thursday... The BCI's response targets what it describes as SILF's 'obstructionist stance,' asserting that the group represents only a small clique of large, established firms and not the majority of India's 90-95% small and mid-sized practices. These emerging firms, the BCI argues, have long been excluded from cross-border legal opportunities due to the gatekeeping and foreign affiliations maintained by SILF's dominant members. The Bar Council emphasised that its amended 2025 Regulations are designed to democratise access to global legal practice, particularly for young lawyers and underrepresented law firms seeking international exposure. Contrary to SILF's claims, BCI clarified that foreign law firms are not permitted to practice Indian law, appear before courts or tribunals, or handle litigation-related matters. The 2025 Regulations, as clarified by the BCI, impose strict boundaries on foreign participation: No practice of Indian law in any form is allowed. No appearances in Indian courts, tribunals, or quasi-judicial authorities (Rule 8(2)(b)). Permitted activities are confined to advisory roles involving foreign law, public/private international law, or international arbitration. Prohibited activities include conveyancing, title verification, and legal drafting related to Indian proceedings (Rule 8(2)(c)). International arbitration participation is allowed only where disputes involve foreign law or non-Indian parties (Rule 8(2)(e)). All foreign firms must first obtain a No Objection Certificate (NOC) from the Government of India (Rule 4(a)). In a bid to make policymaking more inclusive, BCI has also announced a National Conference of Indian Law Firms to be held in Mumbai in September 2025. The event will provide a platform for nationwide participation, particularly from regional and smaller firms traditionally excluded from SILF's centralised control. Simultaneously, the BCI is working to create a central registry of law firms and their lawyers, which will eventually enable a democratically elected national body to represent India's legal profession--a contrast to SILF, which the BCI notes has not held internal elections for decades. The BCI alleged that SILF's core motivation stems from fear of losing its exclusive foreign work pipeline. 'Many of these same firms already maintain foreign offices or unofficial tie-ups with foreign law firms,' said the Council. 'Their opposition is not to foreign entry per se, but to the possibility that foreign clients may choose to engage with newer and smaller Indian firms instead.' BCI has firmly rejected claims that the amended rules compromise India's legal independence. 'The Regulations explicitly protect Indian legal sovereignty. No foreign lawyer or firm will be allowed to interpret, argue, or practice Indian law,' the statement reads. Any attempt to circumvent the provisions by Indian or foreign entities will attract regulatory action, including monetary penalties, suspension of registration, disqualification, and possible disciplinary or criminal proceedings, the BCI stated in the statement. The BCI has reiterated that the Regulations are legally valid, currently in force, and not under abeyance or judicial challenge. They are designed to uplift the entire legal profession, especially young, talented advocates who seek a global presence. While the Council expressed its openness to genuine concerns, it condemned misinformation campaigns and fear-mongering. 'The BCI is committed to reform--not for the few, but for the many,' it stated. 'The future of Indian law must be inclusive, competitive, and global.' (ANI)
Time of India
24-04-2025
- Politics
- Time of India
SC approves finalisation of UGC Regulations 2025
Representative image NEW DELHI: Supreme Court on Thursday green signalled finalisation and notifying of University Grants Commission framed 2025 Regulations to curb caste-based discriminations in higher educational institutions (HEIs) while observing that the recommendations by SC appointed National Task Force on curbing student suicide in HEIs would be considered separately. Appearing for mothers of students, including Rohit Vemula who had committed suicide, senior advocate Indira Jaising strived hard to convince a bench of Justices Surya Kant and N Kotiswar Singh that UGC's draft regulations fell short of expectations and that it should not either be notified or enforced till the NTF headed by former SC judge S Ravindra Bhat gave its recommendations on measures to curb such unfortunate incidents. When solicitor general Tushar Mehta attempted to convey to the court that the Regulations, framed after taking views of all stakeholders, are being finalised, a mercurial Jaising flared up accusing Mehta of interjecting unnecessarily. "If the Regulations meet even a fraction of the expectations for ensuring a non-discriminatory atmosphere in the HEIs, it would be beneficial for those silent majority who are waiting for a fresh UGC Regulation," Justice Kant-led bench said.
The Hindu
24-04-2025
- Politics
- The Hindu
SC gives green signal for notification of new UGC Regulations to fight campus discrimination
The Supreme Court on Thursday (April 24, 2025) did not agree with a plea to stall the finalisation and subsequent notification of the University Grants Commission (Promotion of Equity in Higher Education Institutions) Regulations of 2025 to counter discrimination in higher educational institutions' campuses. A Bench of Justices Surya Kant and N. Kotiswar Singh was hearing an application filed by the mothers of Rohith Vemula and Payal Tadvi, represented by senior advocate Indira Jaising and advocates Prasanna S. and Disha Wadekar, to stall the notification of the 2025 Regulations until a National Task Force chaired by former Supreme Court judge, Justice S. Ravindra Bhat, formed by the apex court in a judgement on March 24 came out with its comprehensive report on mental health concerns, suicides of students and discrimination faced by them along with recommendations to counter these issues. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta objected to the submission made by Ms. Jaising, saying a meeting to finalise the 2015 Regulations was already underway on April 24 and the process of notifying them must not be stopped. Ms. Jaising said there were still 'grey areas', especially regarding caste discrimination, in the 2025 Regulations. She urged the court to direct stay the notification of the new Regulations till the Task Force recommendations came on board. Until then, Ms. Jaising said, the extant 2012 Regulations could continue to be implemented. The court took the middle path, saying the 2025 Regulations would be notified, but the Task Force's work would not be affected by it. In fact, the Task Force would also consider the 2025 Regulations to spot any lacunae which needed to be addressed. Once the Task Force came out with its recommendations, they would be considered and incorporated into the Regulations, if found necessary. The court gave the petitioners or anyone concerned liberty to approach the court once the Task Force recommendations came out to suggest any additions, deletions or incorporations. 'These Regulations [of 2025] will be notified and it will not affect the work of the Task Force. The Task Force recommendations can be included or the Union government may also come out with appropriate suggestions,' Justice Kant observed. The March 2025 judgement by a Coordinate Bench of the Supreme Court headed by Justice J.B. Pardiwala was based on an appeal filed by the parents of two deceased students against a January 2024 order of the Delhi High Court which refused to direct the police to register an FIR in connection with the death by the two students. While Ayush Ashna was found dead on July 8, 2023 in his hostel room, Anil Kumar was found dead on September 1, 2023 in his hostel room at IIT Delhi. It was alleged that both the students, who belonged to the Scheduled Castes, were murdered and they had earlier confided in their parents being subjected to caste discrimination. Ms. Jaising said she would make representations on behalf of her clients before the Task Force. Rohith Vemula, a PhD scholar at Hyderabad Central University, and Payal Tadvi, a tribal student of TN Topiwala National Medical College, died by suicide in January 2016 and May 2019, respectively, after being subject to on-campus caste bias. In February, the Union government had informed the apex court in an affidavit that the new set of Regulations would wipe out discrimination, especially on the basis of religion or caste. The draft Regulations, which were placed on record in the court, would give the University Grants Commission 'teeth and power' to de-recognise non-compliant or misbehaving higher education institutions. The draft Regulations were published in the UGC website for inviting public comments and suggestions. The Regulations described its objective as the eradication of discrimination on the basis of religion, race, sex, place of birth, or caste, particularly against the members of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, socially and educationally backward classes, economically weaker sections, or any of them, and to promote full equity and inclusion amongst the stakeholders in higher education institutions. The Regulations would also allow the UGC to take 'additional punitive actions' on a case-to-case basis. eom
