Author: Prof. (Dr.) Sudhanshu Ranjan Mohapatra,
Head of Department of Law – Guru Ghasidas Vishwavidyalaya
In his enduring wisdom, Plato advocated for the education and refinement of the finest legal intellects to uphold the pillars of justice. According to him, law emerges as a crucible where exceptional legal minds are forged, refined, and instilled with the principles of integrity, competence, and ethical responsibility, which help a society governed by equity, fairness, and adherence to the rule of law.
Legal education in India dates back to the Vedic era, based on the philosophy of Dharma. Although formal education dedicated to imparting law is absent, the concepts of Karma and Dharma serve as foundational grandeur for every individual. In matters relating to karma, individuals traditionally acquired training through self-initiative. The king would personally administer justice or appoint judges and assessors for this purpose. On the other hand, the concept of Dharma underwent transformation with the advent of British colonial rule in India. The contemporary Indian regime is yet another legacy of imperialism introduced after British rule was established in India. However, during British rule, the formalization of legal education began with the establishment of the first three universities in Calcutta, Madras, and Bombay offering legal courses in the year 1857. Initially characterized by a didactic instructional approach and a lack of emphasis on practical training, legal education in India underwent significant reforms with the implementation of the Advocates Act of 1961 and the establishment of the Bar Council of India. In 1985, a pivotal moment in legal education took place with the establishment of the first law university of the country, the National Law School of Indian University, Bangalore, ushering in a new era of innovative teaching methodologies, including case-based studies, clinical courses and moot courts, aimed at imparting practical skills alongside theoretical knowledges. Despite all those reforms, India is still facing contemporary challenges
in its legal journey. Against this backdrop, the National Education Policy (NEP), 2020 emerges as a significant milestone in the country’s educational landscape. The NEP 2020 is perhaps the most ambitious education policy in the history of India because of its comprehensive approach to addressing diverse needs and aspirations of stakeholders.
NEP 2020 introduces specific modifications and reforms tailored to the legal education sector. Such as:
Socio-Cultural integration in Legal Education:
The integration of socio-cultural dimensions into legal education emerges as a vital response to the widening gap between the legal profession and public perception. Amid the rise in unethical conduct among legal practitioners, the profession has also losing credibility. The NEP emphasises the imperative of enhancing social significance and acceptability within legal education. By expanding the curriculum to encompass socio- cultural aspects, the NEP aims to infuse legal studies with the foundational values of Indian democracy, fostering greater relevance and resonance with society. This endeavour involves drawing from the diverse tapestry of Indian culture, tradition, and history, encompassing tales of the triumph of “Dharma” over “Adharma” woven in Indian mythology and literature. The policy advocates for the incorporation of legal history, jurisprudential traditions, and the principle of justice into the education system while acknowledging the inherent symbiosis between law and society.
Inclusion of a multilingual approach in Legal Education:
The Indian Constitution officially recognises 22 languages, which portrays India’s linguistic diversity. This multilingualism is integral to India’s distinct cultural identity. keeping this in mind, the National Education Policy 2020 advocates that state institutions offering legal education should perceive education in the regional language tailored to its linguistic demographics, apart from English. While this endeavour holds potential, challenges still remain, especially for students attending universities outside their home states. Although the appointment of bilingual instructors to facilitate translation was proposed by NPA, however, this approach only partially addresses the language barrier issue. To effectively address this challenge, the NEP should prioritise bilingual education and offer supplementary English classes, because English is still the predominant language in the legal domain. Hence, while promoting vernacular language is crucial, it is essential to maintain a balance with bilingualism in India.
Prioritizing Clinical Legal Education
The National Education Policy, 2020, emphasis on the role of clinical legal education, recognising its significance in imparting practical training and experiential learning within legal studies. This educational approach helps law students engage directly with real life legal scenarios and cases. The policy also advocates for the establishment of legal clinics within law schools and universities. Under the guidance of faculty and legal practitioners, these clinics would offer students opportunities to conduct legal research and provide counsel. Such initiatives aim to facilitate the development of vital legal skills alongside a solid ethical foundation through active involvement in the community and hands-on training. Furthermore, the NEP emphasises the incorporation of practical training components into the law school curriculum. This entails obligatory internships, externships, moot court competitions, which help the students craft various legal skills such as research, writing, counselling, and negotiation. By integrating these practical elements, students can better prepare for the challenges of legal practice.
The National Education Policy (NEP) 2020 represents a significant effort to address contemporary challenges in India’s educational sector, yet it falls short in adequately addressing concerns within professional education, particularly in legal education. The NEP overlooks critical aspects such as constitutional principles and the input of legal academics and regulators. Notably, the NEP’s emphasis on culture, tradition, and mythology in legal education raises concerns about the promotion of Hindu nationalism and the potential reinforcement of outdated and discriminatory ideologies. Furthermore, in comparison to other Asian countries, the policy fails to adequately address India’s lag in meeting the demands of the globalised legal profession. While the NEP advocates for inviting the top 100 international institutions to establish a presence in India, aiming to retain Indian students within the country, however, this approach may not be optimal, as the top institutions may not align with India’s specific needs. Additionally, the credit score earned by students at foreign institutions is also recognised under NEP 2020. India can better itself as a hub for legal education and meet the demands of the globalised legal profession by fostering collaboration and flexibility. In conclusion, legal education today requires urgent clarification, direction, and the development of new concepts to address the myriad challenges it faces. To achieve the necessary depth, breadth, and broad perspective, a revolutionary approach is essential to effectively tackle contemporary problems. Striving for genuine adherence to principles while acknowledging the need for change is imperative. To make Indian legal education relevant in the era of globalization, the training of future lawyers to navigate global legal challenges while upholding constitutional goals and domestic justice is crucial.