BJP MP Manan Kumar Mishra連續第七次當選BCI主席

法律和正義並不完全相同，因此對於那些失去案件的人來說，什麼是不公正的，將為獲獎者伸張正義。

Law and justice are not identical, so what is injustice for those who have lost a case will mean justice for the winners. This became obvious when a lawyer from the Jamshedpur District Bar Association, Sudhir Kumar Pappu, voiced concern over senior advocate Manan Kumar Mishra’s ability to do justice to dual roles—as a Rajya Sabha MP and as chairman of the Bar Council of India (BCI). The BCI is the regulatory body for advocates throughout India and frames rules for advocates and senior advocates who are practising.

法律和正義並不完全相同，因此對於那些失去案件的人來說，什麼是不公正的，將為獲獎者伸張正義。當Jamshedpur地區律師協會的律師Sudhir Kumar Pappu對高級倡導者Manan Kumar Mishra擔任雙重角色的能力（作為Rajya Sabha MP和印度律師委員會（BCI）主席）表示關注。 BCI是整個印度倡導者的監管機構，也是正在執業的倡導者和高級擁護者的框架規則。

It is among the four most influential organisations regulating advocates in the country. The others are the Supreme Court Bar Association, the Supreme Court Advocates on Record (AoR) Association, in which advocates who have cleared the tough AoR examination must register, and the Bombay Bar Association.

它是該國規範倡導者的四個最具影響力的組織之一。其他是最高法院律師協會，最高法院的倡導者（AOR）協會，在該協會中，清除嚴格的AOR考試必須註冊的倡導者以及孟買律師協會。

Manan Kumar Mishra was elected unopposed as the BCI chairman for the seventh consecutive time. He is also a BJP Rajya Sabha MP from Bihar. Ipso facto, this senior advocate is both a politician and practices law. This raises the question of whether a politician who is busy with party politics can simultaneously practice law, as both are full-time professions. There are a few persons who have passed their MBBS and also their LL.B degrees but cannot practice both medicine and law simultaneously. If a doctor who has passed his LL.B cannot practice law, there is no reason why a Rajya Sabha MP should head the BCI.

曼南·庫馬爾·米甚拉（Manan Kumar Mishra）連續第七次被當選為BCI主席。他還是比哈爾邦的BJP Rajya Sabha MP。事實上，這位高級倡導者既是政治家，又是法律。這就提出了一個問題，即一個忙於政黨政治的政治家是否可以同時執行法律，因為兩者都是全職專業。有幾個人通過了MBB和LL.B學位，但不能同時執行醫學和法律。如果通過LL.B的醫生無法執行法律，那麼沒有理由為什麼Rajya Sabha MP應該領導BCI。

Similarly, there are chartered accountants who have passed their LL.B but are not allowed to simultaneously practice law and accountancy. A company secretary who is on the rolls of the Institute of Company Secretaries of India with an LL.B degree cannot practice as a company secretary and an advocate simultaneously.

同樣，有一些特許會計師通過了LL.B，但不允許同時執業法律和會計。由LL.B學位的公司秘書研究所擔任公司秘書研究所的公司秘書不能同時擔任公司秘書和倡導者。

Being an MP or an MLA is a full-time profession. MPs of the Lok Sabha or the Rajya Sabha have to strictly adhere to the party whip, while the role of the BCI chairman demands a neutral stance to regulate lawyers' conduct and uphold standards and ethics within the legal profession. “Holding dual positions of the BCI chairman while being a BJP MP in the Rajya Sabha compromises integrity and professional ethics,” Pappu declared.

成為國會議員或MLA是全職職業。 Lok Sabha或Rajya Sabha的國會議員必須嚴格遵守黨派的鞭子，而BCI主席的角色要求中立立場來規範律師的行為，並維護法律職業內的標準和道德。帕普宣稱：“擔任BCI主席的雙重職務是Rajya Sabha的BJP議員，妥協了誠信和職業道德。”

The Modi government’s proposal to amend the Advocates Act evoked protests across India. Lawyers strongly opposed the draft bill, voicing fears it would curtail the independence and autonomy of lawyers. The government was forced to withdraw this proposal following these pan-India protests. The government sent the draft bill to an expert committee for review.

莫迪政府修改《倡導者法》的提議喚起了印度的抗議活動。律師強烈反對法案草案，表達了擔心，這會削弱律師的獨立性和自治權。在這些泛印度抗議活動之後，政府被迫撤回該提議。政府將法案草案發送給專家委員會進行審查。

Notwithstanding these developments, the BCI chairman publicly supported the Act, stating its passage was his priority. Pappu raised a question as to how the BCI chairman could guarantee the existing draft would not be notified as a law which would be detrimental to lawyers.

儘管有這些事態發展，BCI主席仍公開支持該法案，並指出其通過是他的首要任務。 Pappu提出了一個問題，即BCI主席如何保證不會將現有草稿通知為有害律師的法律。

If one analyses all these aspects, it becomes obvious that Mishra’s role as a BJP MP of the Rajya Sabha ensures he will support the laws passed by the government, irrespective of whether lawyers support or oppose them. When a bill is presented in Parliament, Mishra will be duty-bound to obey the party whip, thereby compromising his duty towards all lawyers in the country. If he defies the party whip, he has to resign.

如果一個人分析了所有這些方面，那麼很明顯，米甚拉（Mishra）作為Rajya Sabha的BJP MP的角色確保他將支持政府通過的法律，而不論律師是支持還是反對他們。當議會提出一項法案時，米甚拉（Mishra）將有責任服從黨派鞭子，從而損害他對該國所有律師的義務。如果他反對黨的鞭子，他必須辭職。

Just as Goa was supposed to have enacted the Journalists’ Protection Act, which was withdrawn, the long-pending Advocate Protection Act, which was to have been introduced in the Rajya Sabha as a private bill, has been kept in cold storage. Pappu asked why Mishra had not used his influence as a Rajya Sabha MP to secure a budget provision of Rs 5000 crore for the welfare of advocates throughout the country.

正如果阿本來應該頒布了《記者保護法》，該法案被撤回一樣，這是一項長期以來的倡導者保護法，該法案是在拉賈·薩卜哈（Rajya Sabha）作為私人法案中引入的，也一直保存在冷藏中。帕普問為什麼米甚拉（Mishra）為什麼沒有將自己的影響力用作Rajya Sabha MP，以確保全國倡導者福利為500億盧比的預算規定。

Emphasising the need for an undivided commitment, Pappu urged Mishra to step down from the BCI chairmanship if he wishes to continue as a Rajya Sabha MP from the BJP. “Manan Kumar Mishra is engaged in active politics in favour of the BJP. It would be best for him to remain a Rajya Sabha MP and resign from the post of BCI chairman to avoid conflicts of interest,” he asserted.

帕普強調需要做出的承諾，敦促米甚拉敦促米甚拉（Mishra）辭去BCI主席，如果他希望繼續擔任BJP的Rajya Sabha MP。他斷言：“曼南·庫馬爾·米甚拉（Manan Kumar Mishra）從事積極的政治，以支持人民黨。最好是他成為拉吉亞·薩卜哈（Rajya Sabha）國會議員，並辭去BCI董事長的職務，以避免利益衝突。”

The chairman of the BCI must be a role model for young advocates, who enrol in the state bar councils. Unlike mathematics, law is a nebulous subject. It keeps changing with changing governments because each political party professes a different ideology. The chairman of the BCI is elected, not selected, unlike the advocates general of each of the 25 states, who resign along with the chief ministers because they occupy office at the pleasure of the chief minister.

BCI主席必須是參加州律師委員會的年輕倡導者的榜樣。與數學不同，法律是一個模糊的主題。隨著政府的變化，它不斷變化，因為每個政黨都自稱是不同的意識形態。 BCI主席被選為25個州中每個州的擁護者，他們與首席部長一起辭職，因為他們以首席部長的歡迎而辭去了職務。

That the law can be interpreted in different ways is proved by the fact that a former high court judge, Pushpa Ganediwala, was forced to resign after she was demoted as a district and sessions judge on February 12, 2022, due to her controversial verdicts. She ruled the accused had to have “skin-to-skin” contact with a minor with sexual intent to constitute an offence under the POCSO Act. After an uproar all over the country, the 47th CJI, Shar

前高等法院法官普什帕·加尼迪瓦拉（Pushpa Ganediwala）在2022年2月12日被裁員後，由於她有爭議的判決，他被迫辭職，這是由前高等法院法官普什帕·加尼迪瓦拉（Pushpa Ganediwala）被迫辭職的事實證明，這一事實證明了法律，這是可以用不同的方式來證明，該法律可以用不同的方式來證明，這一事實證明了法律。她裁定，被告必須與未成年人的性意圖“皮膚”接觸，以構成POCSO法案。在全國各地的騷動之後，第47 CJI，Shar