BCI’s background check, CCTV mandate ‘unconstitutional’, law community wants it withdrawn

NEW DELHI: Law students, teachers, and lawyers have written an open letter to the Bar Council of India (BCI) expressing concern and disagreement over its notification regarding the implementation of criminal background check system, biometric attendance, and installation of CCTV cameras among other measures in law colleges. The students found the BCI notification in violation of their rights and demanded immediate withdrawal of the order.

In the letter, NAJAR Justice Forum suggested consulting with the public to find solutions to the problems faced by law students. The students noted that the council has issued a notification titled, ‘Implementation of Criminal Background Check System, Declaration Regarding Simultaneous Degree and/or regular Academic Programs, Employment status, Attendance Compliance, and Biometric Attendance, & Installation of CCTV cameras, in all Centers of Legal Education’ citing judicial observations concerning the need to assess the backgrounds and antecedents of law students.

However, the BCI has not specified the case or context of these observations, nor has it provided details on the specific comments made. The notification concludes by emphasizing that the legal profession demands the highest standards of ethics, integrity, and accountability.

“If that is the case, then BCI should first and foremost hold itself to these standards, be transparent in its conduct, place before the public all information and at the very least hold open and public consultations before issuing notifications with such wide and serious ramifications,” the letter read.

Also read IISc Bengaluru: Over 800 students, faculty sign petition to cancel 'India-Israel Business Summit'

The law community found a lack of clarity on the objectives and connection between the objectives and measures proposed in the notice. They argued that the notification violates the Constitution.

Criminal background checks

Calling the rule mandating law students to declare any ongoing FIR, criminal case, conviction or acquittal before issuance of final marksheet and degree “absolutely bizarre”, the students said they’re being targeted and that the norm cannot be imposed through a mere notification by a statutory body without a law approved by the Parliament. The students and teachers asked where BCI is deriving its powers from, to put out such an order.

“And what impact does the criminal antecedent of a person have on their legal education? Not just this, BCI expects all law colleges to leave everything aside and conduct a ‘thorough criminal background check’ on each student. Again, what is the objective sought to be achieved here? This is also completely arbitrary and ultra vires the jurisdiction and powers of BCI and a wastage of time and resources of law colleges,” said the law community. It suggested making it voluntary for students to declare their criminal antecedents, however, it should not mean withholding of their marksheets upon failure of submission.

Biometric attendance, CCTV surveillance

Coming to the requirement for biometric attendance and CCTV surveillance, the forum said it stands in stark contrast to the post-Puttaswamy jurisprudence regarding the right to privacy. Firstly, it is unclear what objective is achieved by implementing biometric attendance and surveillance in classrooms. Is the issue of low attendance or proxy attendance truly so pervasive and entrenched that it justifies such a significant infringement on the privacy of both students and teachers?, asked students. BCI has not provided any justification or evidence demonstrating the severity of the problem it aims to address, nor has it explored less intrusive alternatives. Given the legal principles established in Puttaswamy and subsequent rulings, the BCI's directive is unconstitutional and void from the outset.

The letter further noted that students are well aware of the consequences of not maintaining minimum attendance. However, they should not be compelled to attend classes through invasive measures such as biometric attendance and CCTV surveillance. Often, students miss classes due to issues such as inadequate infrastructure, ineffective teaching methods, and an outdated syllabus. Additionally, numerous 'fake' law colleges operate under the BCI's radar, offering degrees without requiring class attendance. The BCI should focus its efforts on addressing these critical issues rather than pressuring students to attend classes, the forum said.

Also read Unsafe environments, no basic amenities: Lack of safety at govt hospitals a ‘direct threat’ to doctors

Furthermore, the BCI fails to mention any obligation for law colleges to implement privacy measures to safeguard the sensitive data collected through these systems. Who will be held accountable for the safety and security of this data? Will the BCI take responsibility in cases of biometric fraud? Moreover, do all law colleges have the necessary resources to comply with such a directive? This entire approach is misguided and unconstitutional.

Simultaneous degrees, employment status

As far as employment status is concerned, the law students argued that many aspirants are compelled to undertake part-time jobs owing to their poor financial conditions. “No student must be penalized for being poor and for trying to acquire education and improve their lives through sheer grit and struggle,” the law community stated. As long as students are meeting the minimum attendance requirements and passing their exams, they should not be stripped off of their degrees just because they’re working to make the two ends meet and didn’t disclose it to the institution.

“In conclusion, the entire notification is seriously flawed, illegal, impractical, unconstitutional and cannot be sustained. BCI must immediately withdraw the notification. And then BCI is earnestly advised to hold open and public consultations to come up with feasible, practical and legal rules to address real and credible problems. Issuing such problematic notifications to deal with make-believe problems cannot be permitted in a democratic polity governed by rule of law,” the students, lawyers, and law faculty stated and hoped that BCI will withdraw the notification with immediate effect.