The Human Behind The Robe: Ethics And Professional Expression
Milonee Dubey, B.A. LL.B., Symbiosis Law School, Hyderabad
ABSTRACT
The courtroom is generally considered a place of discipline, restraint and professional decorum. But judges, advocates and litigants are still human beings with their own beliefs, feelings, frustrations and conscience. The two incidents discussed below illustrate the complex moral question of the division between professional duty and personal expression in the justice system and the different institutional reactions to these incidents. The analysis considers attorneys' professional responsibility, the role of litigants who represent themselves, and a judge's duty to ensure justice and ethical conduct. It also explores the interconnection between the decorum in the courtroom and freedom of expression, personal conscience and access to justice. The article examines the boundaries of contempt and disciplinary jurisdiction in light of the principles that were laid down in cases like In Re: Vinay Chandra Mishra, R.K. Anand v Registrar, Delhi High Court and Supreme Court Bar Association v Union of India. It also sets apart true civil disobedience from the sort of disorder that may happen in court and how extended waiting in a court may lead to frustration for the litigants. It is believed that professional ethics have to be considered from a two-sided perspective: not only the one of the people in front of the court, but also that of the people who are not. Rather, mutual accountability is necessary for judicial honour and professionalism. Rigorous and proportional adoption of ethical norms is crucial to maintain the public trust, fairness and the legality of the justice system.
Keywords: Professional Duty; Personal Conscience; Access to Justice; Contempt; Disciplinary Jurisdiction.
