“Equals, Not Exceptions”: Justice B.V. Nagarathna Tells the Bar to Rethink How It Treats Women Lawyers
EduLaw EditorialLegal UpdatesWhen a sitting Supreme Court judge asks the Bar to treat women advocates as professional peers, the legal fraternity is being asked to look at itself. Justice B.V. Nagarathna’s remarks go beyond courtesy and point to the culture of the courtroom. Every advocate has seen it: a woman rises to argue, and the room treats her as an exception rather than a colleague. Justice B.V. Nagarathna of the Supreme Court of India has now put that habit under scrutiny. Her message to male lawyers is that women advocates must be treated as equals and as professional peers. The remark is short, but it goes to something the profession rarely discusses. Law schools in India now produce women graduates in numbers almost equal to men, and many begin their careers at the junior level on equal footing. Justice Nagarathna has pointed out that this parity does not carry through to senior positions, where women remain far fewer. The question she raises is why, and her answer lies in attitudes as much as in rules. Her earlier addresses explain what she means. She has observed that women lawyers often are not given the same presumption of competence and commitment as their male colleagues. That presumption is rarely stated aloud, but it shapes who gets briefed, who gets the important matter, and whose submissions are heard patiently. According to her, the burden is heavier still for women from minority backgrounds, including disabled women and members of the LGBTQIA+ community. History is part of the explanation. Speaking at the launch of Senior Advocate Indira Jaising’s book, Justice Nagarathna noted that men in the profession have long benefited from informal networks of familiarity, recommendation and sponsorship. Most women enter without that support. She therefore urged a sisterhood within the profession and asked senior lawyers to mentor juniors regardless of gender. Respect in the courtroom, in her view, has to be matched by opportunity outside it. She has also rejected the idea that women are intruding on male spaces. In her view, they are dismantling barriers that kept them out for generations. She has said that inclusion does not dilute merit, because it challenges bias rather than standards. She has also observed that women advocates under the age of 45 are rarely elevated to the High Courts, even though their ability matches that of their male counterparts. For fairer access to work, she has suggested that governments include women in at least thirty per cent of their legal panels. The message matters because courtroom culture is learned. Junior lawyers copy what they see: how seniors address a woman opponent, whether they interrupt her, whether they treat her argument as seriously as anyone else’s. A profession that rests on fairness cannot ask the public to trust it while tolerating condescension within its own ranks. Equal respect is part of professional ethics, not a favour extended to women. For young advocates and law students, the lesson is practical. Mentor across gender lines. Brief women colleagues on significant matters. Address opponents and co-counsel with the same courtesy you expect. Small habits, repeated daily, decide whether the Bar’s promise of equality is real. Justice Nagarathna’s remarks are a reminder that constitutional values must be practised in chambers and corridors as well as in judgments. An inclusive profession is built when every advocate who stands up to argue is heard as a peer.