In this interview from 2010, Nariman speaks on issues ranging from legal education, ethics and the practice of law, work-life balance and several other topics. The nation mourned the passing away of the one of the most respected and well-versed members of the legal fraternity Fali Sam Nariman some days ago. Even as tribute poured in for the eminent jurist, we look back to an interview we had done with Nariman back in 2010. In this interview from Bar & Bench’s archives, Nariman speaks on issues ranging from legal education, ethics and the practice of law, work-life balance and several other topics.
Edited excerpts follow.
Bar & Bench: Why did you choose law? Talk us through your college days.
Fali Sam Nariman: Law was the last option for me. My father wanted me to take the Indian Civil Service exam, but I knew he couldn’t afford it. I had secured a second class in my BA degree and there was no other choice left other than law, as I had no sense of science or mathematics.
In the Government Law College, we used to run a Parliament and we ran it almost as well as or as badly as it is being run right now. At the college Parliament, the Principal was the King and we strictly followed all the rules by the book. We had a system of election and I belonged to the Democratic Party. I was elected as the Prime Minister for the 1st year, leader of the opposition party in my 2nd year and as Speaker in my 3rd year.
Bar & Bench: How tough were the initial years of practice?
Fali Sam Nariman: The initial years were tough, although how tough can’t be measured. We were fortunate enough, because if we worked hard, the judges were extraordinarily competent and very kind to juniors. The judges didn’t bother about whether a senior appeared or not. They were very happy if a competent junior appeared, especially after an experience of 5 years or so.
Even when you were a raw junior at the Bar, the judges used to say in a very heavy voice, Notice of Motion to a Senior Counsel, that you are appearing alone? Then the Solicitor would take the hint and we would get the crumbs from a brief – Mr. Nariman also appeared along with the Senior Counsel! I knew nothing at that point of time, but that was very encouraging.
Bar & Bench: What advice would you give to today’s students and budding lawyers?
Fali Sam Nariman: Today, you have tremendous choice. Comparatively, we knew nothing; probably 10 per cent of what the law students know today. For aspiring law students, I would like to say in your career, never try to show off. There is a tremendous amount of knowledge to be learnt, there is a tremendous amount of experience to be had in the field of law and no one can say “I’m on top and I know everything.” No, you don’t. The moment you say you know everything, I’m afraid that’s the beginning of your downfall. It’s a never-ending process of learning and humility is essential because you can never learn the law. At the age of 92, my senior Jamsetjee Kanga used to say “I’m still learning” and he really meant it. If an odd chap walked into his chamber, he would just pick up a case and tell us about it, he was like a wizard. He could spot the most important point in the case, unlike us.
I don’t like the system of moot courts these days in law schools. My grand-daughter participates in these moot courts, but I don’t like the idea of saying, in A vs. B it was said etc…It makes no difference to what was said in a given case because by and large, all of it depends on the facts of the case, except for constitutional matters.
Bar & Bench: The Bar Council of India has proposed several changes in the legal education space. What are you comments on the BCI regulating legal education?
Fali Sam Nariman: Anything is better than the Bar Councils, because Bar Councils are elected bodies and they haven’t done too well. Exceptions are there, for instance the Solicitor General of India, (Gopal Subramanium) is a very competent advocate and is now (then) the Chairman of the Bar Council. Therefore, if his approach is taken likewise, it will be a boon. Some of the initiatives of the Chairman are laudabale such as the Bar exam and other changes that he has proposed.
Law is a matter of the heart, as well as the head. You have to have compassion; it is one of the greatest qualities. Fali Nariman
Bar & Bench: You have voiced your concerns on the appointment of judges? How do you think we can improve the appointment process? Do you think the United States system of Senate approval should be adopted here?
Fali Sam Nariman: The Collegium system doesn’t and hasn’t worked at all. The US system won’t work here either. I’m not sure if the National (Judicial Appointments) Commission will work. I myself was very enthusiastic about it, but now with years of wisdom, I’m very doubtful of whether it will work at all. I’m not sure of who appoints, but the person who gets appointed should have something in him or her which makes them diversify and grow. I have seen judges grow from court to court. There was Justice JM Shelat who started off as a judge in the city civil court and was reasonable, nothing great. When he reached the High Court, he was much better and when he came to the Supreme Court, he was extremely good. He had shed all his inhibitions, his idiosyncrasies. As you grow, you have to shed all your weaknesses.
Bar & Bench: What is the legal area which interests you the most and why?
Fali Sam Nariman: In my view, I’m most fascinated by constitutional law. How to work the Constitution is far more important than how to write it. I recall when the Foreign Minister of Bangladesh came to visit me (to draft the Bangladesh Constitution). I was the Additional Solicitor General then. We gave them ideas and drafts were exchanged, but it didn’t last for more than a couple of years. Writing a Constitution is simpler; borrowing ideas from everywhere is nothing great. How to work the Constitution is a grave challenge and it’s fascinating.
Writing a Constitution is simpler; borrowing ideas from everywhere is nothing great. How to work the Constitution is a grave challenge and it’s fascinating.
Bar & Bench: What was your most embarrassing moment?
Fali Sam Nariman: In a long life of ups and downs, perhaps the most embarrassing has been when I was part of a team representing Bombay University against a visiting team from England of Oxford and Cambridge University. This was during my college days in Bombay in 1949. I was quite a debater and took pains over my speech and learnt it over by rote. In the debate, I had 15 minutes and I performed excellently in the first 12, where I remembered all that I had mugged-up. And then memory failed! Before an audience of about 300 in the Convocation Hall of the Bombay University, it was the most embarrassing moment of my life. For several years thereafter, I used to have nightmares about this memory lapse! Since then, I have always taken care to have a transcript of what I would be saying so that when that unreliable ally “memory” failed, the script could take over!
Bar & Bench: Do you have any regrets?
Fali Sam Nariman: One gets the usual regrets from time to time. When you lose a case, you regret it. One very important thing that young lawyers must know is that when one argues a case and later in the evening you ponder over it and say, that’s what I should have said (but you never said it), that’s the only regret. It could have been the winning point or something you wish you had not said, which is even worse. If you get angry at that point in the courtroom, losing your temper can be a disaster. You can’t afford it, because your client suffers and nobody likes you for it. It all comes with age and practice.
If you get angry in the courtroom, losing your temper can be a disaster. You can’t afford it because your client suffers. It all comes with age and practice. Fali S Nariman
(Courtesy : barandbench.com)
Follow our WhatsApp channel
