Other than Entry Numbers: Women Retention in the Legal Profession and Structural Reform – The Call by CJI

Introduction

Recently, the Chief Justice of India, Surya Kant, brought out a paradoxical situation in the Indian legal profession: not only are more women joining the profession than ever before, it is only a small percentage of them who remain in the profession long enough to live what he called a true professional life in the law. The point makes a larger structural issue come to mind, which is not access, but retention and progression.

The Illusion of Progress

There has been a gradual growth in women admission into law schools and the bar in India over the last several decades. In most of the top-tier colleges, women form almost half, or even larger parts of the student population. In the entry level, thus, the profession seems to be more gender inclusive.

But this seemingly good news hides a disturbing fact. With the progression in careers, the number of women drastically reduces- be it in litigation, law firms, or even judgeship. The comments made by the CJI are an indication that the issue is not an entry one, but rather one of sustainability and involvement in the long term.

Legal Practice Structural Barriers

The Indian legal profession, specifically litigation is a notorious profession. Irrational working hours, absence of professional growth, and reliance on senior mentorship make the atmosphere one that is not easy to manoeuvre. In the case of most women, such problems are added to by the societal expectation about caregiving and family duties.

Compared to the corporate industries, which have slowly incorporated formal policies on workplace, litigation has not been regulated much on working conditions. Lack of maternity care, childcare facilities and flexible working shift force most women to either change positions or even drop out of the profession.

Judiciary and Leadership Leaky Pipeline.

The results of this leeching can be seen in the top of the legal system. Although the number of competent women lawyers continues to increase, the number of women lawyers in senior advocacy, partner in law firms, and constitutional courts is still significantly low.

Even in the judiciary, although some of them have been appointed women judges in recent years, the overall number of women judges is still few. The pipeline problem that is that women do not stay in the profession long enough to be considered with the promotion however, still limits the gender diversity at the decision making levels.

Institutional Reform and Culture

The solution to this problem should not be limited to symbolic acceptance; a fundamental change in the system is needed. Bar associations, law firms, and law courts have to work actively to enable environments. This includes:-

• Setting up mentorship units among women lawyers.
• Promoting fair briefing processes.
• Offering the institutional support like childcare and flexible schedules.
• Enhancing openness in promotions and appointments.
• It is also crucial that there is a necessity to break established cultural practices that consider the careers of women secondary. The attrition cycle will not end without a change in institutional practices and attitude of the society.

The Way Forward

The Surya Kant quote is a welcome change of direction because the idea of gender equality in the legal profession cannot be quantified only through the statistics of entry levels. Real inclusion is having women not just join the profession, but also flourish, be top and influence the future of the same.

Conclusion

The increased number of women in law schools and even in entry-level jobs is surely a good move. It is, however, a matter of retaining them as the Chief Justice aptly argued in the true professional life of the law. To close this gap, there must be institutional dedication, change of policies and culture.Any career whose aim of existence is to promote justice should first promote equity in that field. It is only at that point that it will be able to mirror the constitutional values it is supposed to defend.