Case Note & Summary
The Supreme Court addressed the legality of strikes and boycotts by lawyers in a series of writ petitions. The petitions sought a declaration that such actions were illegal, raising concerns about their impact on the administration of justice. The court noted that lawyers, as officers of the court, have a duty to assist in the judicial process and cannot abstain from court appearances based on strike calls. The court highlighted that strikes infringe upon the fundamental right of litigants to a speedy trial, which is protected under Article 21 of the Constitution. Arguments presented included the view that strikes by lawyers are unprofessional and unethical, and that alternative forms of protest should be pursued instead. The court emphasized that any lawyer who holds a vakalat must attend court, and failure to do so constitutes professional misconduct. The court also directed Bar Councils to ensure compliance with these principles and to prevent coercion against lawyers who choose to fulfill their professional duties. Ultimately, the court declared that the current practice of strikes by lawyers is illegal and must cease, reinforcing the obligation of lawyers to maintain the integrity of the legal profession and the judicial system.
Headnote
A) Legal Profession - Right to Strike - Lawyers do not have a right to strike or boycott courts - Advocates must attend court proceedings as officers of the court - The Supreme Court held that strikes by lawyers infringe the fundamental right of litigants to a speedy trial and are thus illegal and unethical. (Paras 30-33) B) Professional Conduct - Duty of Lawyers - Lawyers must uphold their professional duties and obligations to assist in the administration of justice - The court emphasized that lawyers cannot abstain from appearing in court while holding a vakalat, as it constitutes professional misconduct. (Paras 30-33) C) Bar Council Regulations - Need for Compliance - The court directed that Bar Councils should ensure compliance with the rules regarding strikes and boycotts, and that any coercion against lawyers who wish to attend court must be addressed. (Paras 30-33)
Issue of Consideration
Whether lawyers have a right to strike and/or give a call for boycotts of Courts.
Final Decision
The Supreme Court declared that lawyers do not have a right to strike or boycott courts, emphasizing their duty to assist in the administration of justice. The court directed Bar Councils to ensure compliance with these principles and prevent coercion against lawyers who wish to attend court. The court ruled that strikes by lawyers are illegal and unethical.
Law Points
- lawyers' right to strike
- professional misconduct
- contempt of court
- administration of justice
- Bar Council regulations
