Supreme Court
The Bar Council of India (BCI) has made it clear to the Supreme Court that lawyers cannot practice journalism full-time. The ban is imposed in accordance with BCI’s rules of conduct. This rule strictly controls the professional activities of lawyers. The purpose of this decision is to preserve the professional dedication of lawyers and to limit the scope of their work within prescribed limits.
The question posed by Justice Abhay S. before the Bench of Justice Oka and Justice Augustine George Masi was whether an advocate can become a full-time journalist? BCI’s counsel told the court that lawyers were prohibited from playing the dual roles of lawyer and eminent journalist. The BCI also said that lawyers should avoid active participation in any occupation outside the practice of law as it would interfere with their professional obligations.
Why was this decision made?
The case involves a petitioner lawyer who is also a freelance journalist. He asked that the defamation case against him be dismissed. The petitioner’s lawyer assured the court that his client would cease his journalistic activities and focus on his legal practice, whether full-time or part-time.
Also Read- When did riots break out in Uttar Pradesh and how many people died? CM Yogi Adityanath tells the complete history
BCI clarifies position
In its order, the Supreme Court said the BCI has made it clear that full-time journalism is not an advocate’s activity. The decision was taken to prevent workplace conflicts between lawyers and media professionals. The next hearing in the case will be held in February 2025.
Also Read – Drug addiction is not cool, Supreme Court expresses concern over drug addiction among youth in country.
