Throughout these years, law has been considered a noble profession, Advocates not merely create a pathway to justice but they act as a clutch of straw to a drowning man. It is no secret that all these years, Advocates have been misunderstood by all and got little fame only by the monthly or weekly Legal Journals. But in today’s digital age, social media has taken over the place of Journals and Newspapers. Social media not only is providing a platform to these professionals to be in the spotlight, but is also helping to build a bridge between the advocates and people at large. While talking about today’s digital age, it would not be fair to forget AI. Where AI is making Advocates' day-to-day tasks easier, it is also raising a question about Privacy and safety. The ruthless use of social media and AI is questioning the advocate client privilege.

The problem of advertising and self-promotion

The Rule 36 of the Bar Council of India Rules, clearly states that an advocate shall not solicit work or advertise directly or indirectly, which makes it clear that advertising and self-promotion for advocates is barred by the Bar Council of India. The rules also condemn promotional practices such as the use of circulars, advertisements, personal communications, media publicity and the publication of photographs in relation to cases. Although, it is not denied that the people of the Legal fraternity find it extremely difficult to find a decent clientele but if Advocates won’t follow the rules, who would?

Social media has impacted the legal fraternity in a way that it has become difficult to distinguish between legitimate legal literacy and self-promotion. On one hand where some advocates are simply trying to reach out to the public at large with the sole purpose to make people legally woke, some are just trying to lure the clients.

In the not-so-digital era, advocates only got fame through weekly or monthly legal journals or maybe sometimes by showing up in newspapers, but lately social media has hijacked all the attention to itself. Advocates are not only promoting themselves but are also sharing details about the cases over social media, which is highly criticised. By sharing such information just to promote their victory, they do get more clients but they surely prejudice the Advocate Client privilege.

Just because something is in digital form does not mean that the usual restrictions on traditional advertising become meaningless. On the contrary, the speed, extent, and lasting nature of online content may make it all the more important for professionals to promote themselves. Moreover, the Supreme Court has acknowledged the need to keep professional standards and to prevent solicitation among legal professionals. The case of Bar Council of Maharashtra v. M.V. Dabholkar 1976 AIR 242 is a key authority when it comes to understanding the professional duties relating to solicitation and the dignity of the legal profession.

Legal education versus legal marketing

Social media has given a platform to the lawyers, not only to learn but also to take part in public legal education. The educational posts explaining basic human rights, legal developments, landmark judgments, have filled the gap between the legal system and the citizens.

But such posts must only be limited to education and not promoting oneself in order to lure clients. The people of the legal fraternity understand that no two cases can be exactly similar, and may be the facts are identical, the outcome may vary, and posts or reels over social media claiming victory may spread a false hope over the general public.

Sensational headlines do attract higher levels of engagement than a careful examination of the law. For advocates, nevertheless, popularity must not come in sacrifice of accuracy. A professional online presence should be aimed at informing rather than at sensationalising.

Confidentiality in a public forum

Any detail about the client shall be well maintained as confidential by an Advocate and shall not be displayed in order to solicit work, any kind of leak in the information raises a question on the integrity of the legal fraternity.

It is heartbreaking at times how day-to-day courtroom proceedings are shared over social media in form of courtroom drama and how people make jokes out of it, it is for the advocates to understand that it is only them who can save the integrity of this profession.

The situation is especially serious when people who advocate on behalf of clients talk about cases that are currently going on. Commenting in public on the evidence, the witnesses, the settlement talks or the actions of the other side might affect the interests of the clients and could in that way interfere with the proper administration of justice.

The emerging challenge of artificial intelligence

Where artificial intelligence has made the daily drafting work speedy and easy for the advocates, there are some people misusing it. Advocates are ruthlessly using artificial intelligence for day-to-day tasks like drafting, summarising documents and legal research, but they fail to protect the essence of advocacy. The blindly follow AI, instead of simply using it to enhance their work, they are relying upon AI to do their work, which brings unfairness to their work. Although these tools can increase efficiency, they do not take away the advocate's responsibility for the final work product.

Accuracy is especially important; if an advocate publishes or depends on an incorrect statutory provision or one that has no judicial authority behind it, they may cause serious harm. The Supreme Court has recently stressed how serious it is for advocates to present courts with fabricated or hallucinated legal authorities. Its important judgment on this matter highlights the fact that technological assistance cannot take the place of professional verification.

Confidentiality is just as important; before sensitive pleadings, client communications and documents are uploaded to digital tools, privacy, security and the relevant professional duties must be taken into account.

Conclusion

Making work easy and speedy is one thing but blindly following what is trending can take away people’s faith in the legal fraternity. The opportunity that social media has brought to the table shall be grasped to educate people, to fill the gap between the legal fraternity, the system and the general public and not be exploited by breaking the rules. The freedom available in the digital world does not remove professional responsibility.

The main problem for advocates is not whether or not they should have an online presence, but rather how that presence should embody the values of the profession; accuracy, confidentiality, dignity, independence and respect for the administration of justice must continue to be maintained whether an advocate is speaking to a judge in court or to an audience of thousands online.

Although the courtroom has walls, professional responsibility does not. In this digital age, each post, video, comment and professional profile can act as an extension of an advocate's professional identity. The most effective digital strategy for an advocate is therefore not just visibility but visibility that is based on ethics.