BCI Prohibits Advocates Using Actors & Influencers For Promotion; Cautions Against Soliciting Legal Work Through Social Media
Today, the Bar Council of India (BCI) issued a strict warning against 'unethical' legal advertising and misleading social media promotions leading to professional misconduct by advocates. It also denounced the involvement of Bollywood actors and celebrities in such promotions on digital media.
"The Bar Council of India, exercising its statutory and regulatory powers under the Advocates Act, 1961, and the Bar Council of India Rules, strongly condemns and issues a stringent warning against the increasingly prevalent and unethical practice of advocates advertising their legal services through social media, promotional videos, and influencer endorsements. The BCI expressly denounces the involvement of Bollywood actors, celebrities, and digital media platforms as promotional tools, which clearly violate Rule 36, Chapter II, Part VI of the BCI Rules."
The BCI further noted in its press release that advocates are leveraging religious, cultural, or public events for self-promotion through banners, stalls and digital advertisements.
"Such methods clearly constitute unethical canvassing, infringing upon professional ethics and the dignity of legal practice. Lawyers must uphold justice and public service, refraining entirely from commercializing their roles or services through distasteful or misleading advertisements," BCI notes.
It further stated:
"In the age of internet and digital media, the rise of self-styled legal influencers has compounded these ethical concerns. The Bar Council of India notes with serious concern the rapid growth of legal influencers, many such legal influencers who without possessing appropriate credentials, spread misinformation on critical legal issues such as matrimonial disputes, taxation, intellectual property rights, citizenship laws, privacy rights, and GST compliance. Incorrect or misleading interpretations of landmark judgments like the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA), the Right to Privacy ruling in Justice K. S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) v. Union of India, and GST regulations have resulted in widespread confusion, misguided legal decisions, and undue judicial burden."
The BCI has sought immediate withdrawal of the advertisements violating Rule 36, Chapter II, Part VI of the BCI Rules, which states :
“An advocate shall not solicit work or advertise, either directly or indirectly, whether by circulars, advertisements, touts, personal communications, interviews not warranted by personal relations, furnishing or inspiring newspaper comments or producing his photographs to be published in connection with cases in which he has been engaged or concerned.”
It has stressed that any violation of these mandates will lead to severe disciplinary measures, including suspension or cancellation of enrollment and even referral to the Supreme Court for initiation of contempt proceedings and formal complaint to the digital platforms for removal of unethical content.
It has now mandated:
-Prohibition against utilizing Bollywood actors, celebrities, or influencers for legal practice promotions.
-Swift removal of banners, promotional materials, and digital advertisements related to legal practices.
-Mandatory cessation of misleading and unauthorized legal advice dissemination by non-enrolled individuals.
-Absolute prohibition on the use of social media or digital platforms to directly or indirectly solicit legal work.
-Digital platforms must establish stringent vetting mechanisms for legal content and swift removal of misleading information.
-Ethical practices related to online conduct should be followed.
Recently, DSK Legal had courted controversy after sharing an Instagram reel featuring a Bollywood actor endorsing them.
Previously, the BCI had issued a press release in view of the judgment passed by the Madras High Court against the solicitation of work through online platforms. It was highlighted that promotional activities through online digital platforms severely compromise ethical standards and professional integrity.
The High Court had specifically highlighted that many offline platforms are violating the BI Rules and the ethical standards of the Legal profession, unequivocally stating that such activities contravene the Advocates Act, 1961, and the Bar Council of India Rules. Furthermore, the judgment categorically denied these online platforms any protection under the safe harbour provisions outlined in Section 79 of the Information Technology Act, 2000, considering their involvement in facilitating practices expressly prohibited by law, BCI notes in its press release.
Pursuant to this, BCI issued stringent directives to all State Bar Counsels mandating immediate disciplinary action against advocates engaging in unethical advertising or solicitation of work via online portals like Quikr India, Sulekha, com, Just Dial Limited and Grotal.com.
"In consonance with the Supreme Court's judgment in A. K. Balaji v. Union of India, 2018, the BCI reiterates that individuals, associations, firms, companies, juridical persons, and even BPO companies, irrespective of their nomenclature and how they label their operations, are governed by the Advocates Act, 1961, and fall under the regulatory jurisdiction of the Bar Council of India if, in pith and substance, they engage in the practice of law. This judgment firmly establishes the broad regulatory authority of the BCI, reinforcing the council's mandate to enforce ethical practices universally within the profession."
Click here to read the BCI statement