KOCHI : Over the last two decades just two women have risen to the ranks of senior lawyer from the thousands who have been practising in the Kerala High Court. Notwithstanding the disparity, of the 20 designated as seniors by the HC on Thursday —on the eve of International Women’s Day — only one is a woman.
Currently, the total number of senior women lawyers stands at a mere three. This contrasts starkly with the recent ground-breaking decision by the Supreme Court, which saw 11 women designated as senior lawyers from a pool of 56 candidates.
Advocates V P Seemandini and Sumathi Dandapani were named seniors in 2007. In the list published on March 7, the HC designated Advocate Dhanya P Ashokan as a senior. The HC received 60 applications, of which only one was from a woman. It shortlisted 40 applicants, of which 20 were named seniors. As per Kerala Bar Council data, there are 59,015 advocates in the state, of which 24,132 are women. This equates to roughly one female for every two male advocates.
Seemandini, who is vice president (southern region) of the International Federation of Women Lawyers, says there are efficient women lawyers in the HC worthy of being named seniors. “But they don’t believe in submitting the application. In my view, there are currently at least five women who are highly eligible for the post. HC should follow the Supreme Court in identifying suo motu senior women lawyers,” she told TNIE.
‘Women lawyers reluctant to apply for sr post’
“During our time there was no process for submitting applications. I and Sumathi were conferred by the full court,” Seemandini added.
Advocate P K Santhamma, president of the Kerala Federation of Women Lawyers, believes it’s not the fault of judges, who are tasked with designating seniors. “Women lawyers are reluctant to submit applications for the post. As president of the federation, I exhorted many women lawyers to submit applications, but without much luck,” she added.
An amendment to the High Court of Kerala (Designation of Senior Advocates) Rules, 2018, mandates that an advocate can be considered for designation as a senior by the full court suo motu if it feels that she/he is a person of exceptional quality, eminence and has special expertise.
Earlier, the Rules insisted on at least 10 years of experience. The amendment, however, extended it to include 10 years combined practice as an advocate and as a district and sessions judge or as a judicial member of any tribunal, with at least three years of standing as an advocate post retirement from such post. It also introduced a points-based system for assessing candidates. The names of candidates shortlisted for interview, along with names cleared by the committee, will be placed before the full court. The list is finalised based on votes candidates obtain from the full court.