Facing strong resistance from the legal community, the Union Law Ministry has decided to put the proposed Advocates (Amendment) Bill, 2025, on hold. The ministry announced on Saturday, February 22, 2025, that it would revise the draft Bill based on public feedback before proceeding with further consultation.
Proposed Changes Spark Controversy
The proposed amendments to the Advocates Act aimed to redefine key legal terms, including the definitions of legal practitioners and law graduates. The draft Bill was made available on the Law Ministry’s website for public comments. However, many members of the legal fraternity opposed specific provisions, arguing that the amendments could undermine the independence of the legal profession.
The Bar Council of India (BCI) formally objected to the Bill in a letter to Union Law Minister Arjun Ram Meghwal, stating that the proposed changes would compromise the autonomy of legal professionals.
Government’s Response to Concerns
In a statement, the Law Ministry reaffirmed its commitment to transparency and stakeholder engagement, stating, “The Advocates (Amendment) Bill, 2025, was made available for public consultation on February 13, 2025, on the website of the Department of Legal Affairs, demonstrating the government’s commitment to transparency and broader engagement with stakeholders and the public. However, considering the number of suggestions and concerns received, it has been decided to conclude the consultation process now. Based on the feedback received, the draft Bill, as revised, will be processed afresh for consultation with stakeholders.”
Political Opposition and Legal Community’s Reaction
The Congress party also voiced strong objections, calling the Bill “poorly drafted” and urging the government to hold more consultations before finalizing it.
Senior Congress leader Abhishek Manu Singhvi, who leads the party’s legal cell, criticized the Bill, saying, “…Instead of creating a proper forum to allow lawyers to raise their grievances and issues, the proposed Bill takes away lawyers’ rights to raise legitimate demands by way of a boycott or abstinence from work with the imposition of penal consequences.”
He also expressed concerns about the level of government intervention in professional regulatory bodies, stating, “The proposed Bill allows for excessive government interference into the composition, practice and procedure of professional regulatory bodies, thereby deviating from the principle of self-autonomy and self-independence as upheld by the Supreme Court of India.”
