The Bar Council of India (BCI) on Friday issued a circular to lawyers and law students, banning reels and promotional content from court premises and warning against using live streaming proceedings to mock or scandalize the judiciary for digital entertainment.
This comes less than a week after a litigant appeared in person, causing a commotion inside the Supreme Courtroom by throwing papers, using abusive language and disrupting judicial proceedings.
The BCI on Friday also directed all bar councils and bar associations in the state to appoint a nodal social media ethics officer to deal with complaints, in addition to requiring a signed undertaking at the time of registration to ensure professional conduct with regard to social media, digital platforms, data privacy and use of artificial intelligence (AI). For those already working, BCI has asked bar councils and bar associations to encourage members to sign the stakeholder accreditation declaration provided with the circular.
The circular prohibits lawyers, law students, and trainees from making reels, video clips, photographs, or promotional content inside the court buildings, halls, corridors, lawyers’ halls, chambers, or judicial buildings in a manner inconsistent with the dignity and etiquette of the court and the profession.
The ban also extends to the use of garters, gowns or robes for public display, reels, flyers, promotional photos or performances on social media. However, the circular clarified that it is not a complete ban, as it allows the uploading of short legal education in the form of reels, short videos, circular videos, posts, threads, podcast clips or similar condensed digital formats, provided that the content is accurate, contextual, non-soliciting, non-confidential, and does not turn complex legal questions into misleading outcome guarantees.
Read also: The Supreme Court acts after courtroom chaos, tightening rules for litigants in person
Providing a charter of “do’s and don’ts”, the BCI Circular discourages the recording of physical, virtual or hybrid court proceedings. It also requires lawyers not to indulge in clipping, editing or circulating live broadcast proceedings with captions, music, comments, thumbnails or voice-overs that ridicule, ridicule, distort, inflammatory or scandalize the conduct of judges, lawyers or litigants in court.
The restriction applies equally to law students and legal trainees, preventing them from using court buildings, court names, court signage, client documents or room settings as props for personal advertising or branding on social media.
“Each candidate seeking registration as a lawyer may be required, as part of the registration register and orientation process, to execute a separate affidavit recognizing standards of professional conduct relating to social media and digital platforms, confidentiality, dignity of court, data privacy and artificial content/artificial intelligence,” the circular states.
The latest development assumes significance in the context of the recent series of events in which the petitioner who appeared in person was arrested for allegedly abusing the Chief Justice of India inside the Supreme Court chamber and throwing files in a manner that demeaned the dignity of the court and obstructed its functioning. Although the court refused to take action against the person, a video of the incident went viral on social media.
Accordingly, the Full Bench of the Supreme Court decided on July 15 that henceforth, in-person parties who choose to physically attend are permitted on the condition that live streaming or video recording is not permitted.
On 14 July, the High Court issued a notice to the BCI on a public interest litigation raising concerns about the alleged increased use of social media by some advocates as part of digital self-promotion. She also stressed the need for a comprehensive digital code of ethics and digital professional conduct code for the legal profession.
BCI said the circular was issued following an “increasing and worrying” trend among some advocates, law students, trainees and social media users to create, upload and circulate content along with captions to provoke, mock and expose the judiciary, judges, lawyers, litigants or the judicial process itself. “Such actions, if left unanswered, can undermine public confidence in the courts and the administration of justice,” she said, adding that even non-lawyers are using the digital space to spread “misleading legal information.”
In June of this year, the Bahrain Chamber of Commerce and Industry considered a draft circular for the legal profession on social media, and formed a subcommittee to deliberate and study on this topic. The circular also expressed concern over the circulation of forged judgments, excerpts of fabricated orders, misleading summaries, anonymous legal opinions, accounts of fabricated judicial experiences, and publications that tend to mislead litigants and undermine public confidence in the administration of justice.
The circular specified that violation of the circular by stakeholders will result in disciplinary action, and the case may be referred to the state bar councils for action or to the relevant courts. He added that a contempt suit may be filed when the content is scandalous, tends to diminish the authority of the court, or interferes with the administration of justice.
