New DHCBA President N Hariharan on Justice Yashwant Varma, Senior Designations and more

Senior Advocate N Hariharan has been elected as President of the Delhi High Court Bar Association (DHCBA). .Hariharan, who joined the profession in 1987, says he became a lawyer by accident. He had planned to apply for his post-graduation in Science but ended up going to Delhi University's Faculty of Law and filled up the form to study law."Luckily, Professor Upendra Baxi ended up taking the first class and it was a revelation," he recalls. He also took to journalism while studying law..On his decision to stand for the post of the President of DHCBA and fight the elections, Hariharan says, "I have fought this election out of necessity. I don't intend on staying here. I have come here as some kind of corrective measures need to be made.".In this interview with Bar & Bench's Pallavi Saluja, Hariharan talks about the Justice Yashwant Varma controversy, his priorities as Bar President, the senior designation controversy and more..[Watch Video].Pallavi Saluja (PS): You are taking over as President of DHCBA at a time when the judiciary has been hit by a big scandal (over Justice Yashwant Varma). What are your comments as Bar President?.N Hariharan (NH): At the moment, let us wait. There is a judicial probe that is going on. Being a criminal lawyer, my sensibilities and senses are a little bit different on these things. When a judicial probe is on, I think we need to wait. .PS: Does the Bar Association plan to take any stand in this matter? .NH: When the facts are clear, we should, but not when the facts are murky. I don’t think our views, in any way, should affect the facts of the situation.Once the factual narrative is set, then one can comment on that because there is a balance of two things here. One, the institution itself and two, individual rights. As a criminal lawyer, that also concerns me. Whether you would jeopardise someone’s defence - especially of a person who is unable to defend himself at this point of time - because his situation in the entire setup is different. So, I would take the view that let us wait for the facts to be clear and then take a call on this..PS: What do you have to say about all the media trial, especially against a person who is unable to defend himself right now?.NH: Over these years, I have had my share of being in the media facing that situation. I feel that it cuts both ways. At times, the media has to stand up and cry for justice when things go unnoticed. That’s a part of the job the media has to do. Everything is a question of balance..When a judicial probe is on, I think we need to wait. N Hariharan on Justice Yashwant Varma.PS: The Gujarat and Kerala High Court Bar Associations have led the way when it comes to issues like judicial independence, judge transfers and judges' conduct with lawyers. There is a perception that the Delhi High Court Bar is not as unified and proactive. How do you think the Delhi Bar can be strengthened on those lines?.NH: The Delhi High Court Bar has always stood by this - the judiciary should be independent, the Bar should also be independent in expressing its opinions when required. I think that as far as the Delhi High Court Bar and other bars are concerned, they have always led the way. I don't see how the Gujarat Bar or the Kerala Bar are in anyway different. The Bars are all united on this..When the facts are clear, Bar will take a stand, but not when the facts are murky.N Hariharan on Justice Yashwant Varma.PS: What are your top priorities now?.NH: We have lots of concerns. One major concern will be electoral reform, because we live in a different era. We resort to traditional methods in the electoral process. Like this time for instance, due to a paucity or non-availability of EVMs (electronic voting machines), we had to go for the traditional ballot method. With the increasing population that we see today, in our Bar especially - you’ll be surprised to know that our Bar comprises 38,000 people - a process like this gets very tedious for that many people, which it did on this occasion. Out of the 10,000 who were eligible to vote based on various criteria, 7,000 turned up, and even for that number, it was unmanageable to get them in within a time frame of 9 am to 6 pm. So, we definitely need to think in terms of electoral reforms. The idea is to create a level playing field..PS: What are your thoughts on representation of women in bar associations?.NH: It is a very positive step and we have taken that. The number of women taking up the profession now (has greatly increased). In my days, there were hardly a few on the criminal side; you could count them on your fingers. Today, there is a sizable representation of women in all quarters. Their voices need to be heard, they will be heard, and they are being heard. I am amenable to suggestions (to increase women's representation) that come from any quarter, and whatever is possible will definitely be addressed. .PS: What are your thoughts on the controversy surrounding the recent senior designations? Do you think the process needs a change?.NH: Yes, and I think that change is probably happening. The Supreme Court is already addressing that issue. Interestingly, this also started from our High Court, where they tinkered around with the process and the judgment that came earlier, and it has its drawbacks. That is why the Supreme Court is looking into it. There is a talk that there might be a reversion to the system from which I came, where the full court looks into the entire thing instead of a committee being formed and having more channels in-between. .Consider eligible candidates or we will go into it: Supreme Court on Delhi High Court senior designations.PS: In terms of infrastructure at the Delhi High Court, what needs to be changed?.NH: You won’t find anything lacking in the infrastructure of the court rooms; but the Court doesn’t mean only where the judges sit and advocates argue matters. The Court also comprises a substantial constituent, that is the Bar, which ultimately is the medium through which justice is delivered. What are the facilities for the Bar members the strength of which is increasing day-by-day? Has that been addressed? The answer is no. As I said, initially, 38,000 are going there to practice, or at least one third of them are available at any point of time. Do we have the infrastructure to cater to them? No. Parking cannot be solved to a great extent, and for that, we are also responsible. We keep buying cars. In our country, we don’t have the concept of pooling, we don’t share our resources. We don’t use public transport even when it is available. We don’t use public parking spaces. So, parking is difficult to solve.Then there’s chambers. How can you have chambers for 38,000 lawyers? Even I wait in a line, I don’t have a chamber of my own. I am sharing space with someone, someone who was magnanimous enough to share space with me. But you don't find those kind of characters everywhere. What is the answer to this? Two answers come to mind. One, in today’s age and time, we don’t need all these (pointing at books arranged on shelves). These are relics from the past, mummified judgments in books. We have all these on the internet. Today’s young lawyers have access to all these on the click of a button. So this issue can be solved by granting access to a digital library. We have to consider whether the Bar can create a digital library space. Two, utilisation of public spaces. There are public spaces here. Those could be utilised for the younger lot by creating small spaces where their laptop would be their office. You’ll have little space, but with privacy, because there’s privileged communication going on. We could think of creating spaces like that in common spaces. Again, this is easy to promise as an election promise, but difficult to execute unless there is cooperation from the judiciary. That is what I am here for. To try and create that kind of consensus, to make the Bench understand that you can function only if we are there. Only if they give us that kind of access to those spaces, access to digital libraries, it will increase the quality of our Bar, which will automatically reflect on what they do on the Bench. It is a mutual give-and-take and we will have to try to convince them. I will not make any unreasonable demands because what I am saying is reasonable, and I am sure the judiciary will understand and will cooperate on this.