As the Nepal Bar Association gears up for its central working committee election on April 5, the legal fraternity finds itself at a crossroads. The practice of forming ideological panels, such as the BPLA and DLA groups, has been ongoing since the 1990 movement. However, this election cycle has brought an alarming shift—party politics has permeated the selection process like never before.
The DLA group, which typically forms a committee to select candidates, has instead seen nominations dictated by political parties and their top leaders. This direct intervention has left many advocates disillusioned, as it compromises the independence of the Bar. A politically-entangled Bar cannot function freely; it will remain under constant pressure, unable to uphold professional ethics or safeguard the rights of advocates. More worryingly, such a Bar threatens the integrity of the judiciary, given its integral role within the judiciary.
Beyond political interference, another troubling trend looms over Nepal’s legal profession. Increasingly, individuals who have spent their careers in government, academia or other fields secure advocate licenses and quickly ascend to the title of ‘senior lawyer.’ Many of these individuals, having already ensured their financial security elsewhere, lack the commitment to legal ethics and instead drag politics into professional spaces. This dilutes the purity of the profession and weakens the moral fiber of the Bar. Those who have worked their entire lives in different careers, without having any substantial contribution to the legal field, now enter the profession late and demand to be treated as senior advocates without earning the respect and credibility that should come with experience and dedication.
The legal field is also under persistent assault from political parties, leaders and even members of the judiciary, eroding professionalism. Today, only a few lawyers remain independent; many are aligned with political factions or other interest groups. The profession is plagued by party-affiliated lawyers, judicial middlemen, brokers of smugglers, foreign-backed lawyers and those with entrenched corporate ties. These forces have made it increasingly difficult for fresh, independent advocates to sustain themselves, further compromising the profession’s ethical foundations. The number of truly independent lawyers has diminished, and those who try to work ethically often struggle to establish themselves financially. The legal profession, once a noble pursuit of justice, has now become a field where many enter for power, influence and financial gain rather than for the service of the people and in pursuit of justice.
Regardless of who wins the upcoming election, all candidates have contested under the influence of political parties. This means the eventual victor will likely follow party directives rather than prioritizing professional integrity. This is a stark contrast to the Nepal Bar Association of 1990, which once wielded the power to influence political transformation, shape legislation and uphold constitutional principles. In various democratic movements, the Bar played a crucial role in safeguarding the rule of law.
However, since the early 2000s, the Bar’s stature has significantly eroded. Though it still holds responsibilities, it has struggled to fulfill them effectively. The Bar Association once had the capacity to influence governance, advocate for necessary legal reforms, and hold the government accountable. But now, it has become just another platform for political maneuvering, with little regard for the professional values that should define the legal community.
To reclaim the lost credibility of the legal profession, advocates must distinguish between true professionals and political middlemen. Holding a law degree or an advocate’s license does not automatically make one a professional. A true advocate builds a career through courtroom debates, rigorous legal research, and dedication to justice. Seniority should not be granted based on the date of acquiring a license but should be earned through experience, respect from the full court, and significant contributions to legal jurisprudence. The legal profession should be led by those who dedicate their lives to it, not by those who see it as an easy way to gain influence after retiring from other careers.
One of the major problems with the current Bar Association is the lack of strict criteria for recognizing seniority. Today, those who have spent most of their lives in other professions—government service, academia, business—can enter the legal field, take an advocate’s license and immediately demand the privileges of seniority. This practice devalues the profession and undermines those who have spent their entire careers advocating in courtrooms, engaging in legal research and upholding the rule of law.
The judiciary is a pillar of democracy, and if those at its core—lawyers and advocates—are politically influenced, then the entire judicial system is at risk.
The next leadership of the Nepal Bar Association has an immense responsibility—to restore professionalism, protect constitutional principles and rectify past mistakes. It must ensure that ethical standards are upheld, even holding judges accountable when necessary. The upcoming election is not just about electing new office bearers; it is about setting a precedent for the future of Nepal’s legal profession. It is imperative that the Bar reclaims its independence, ensuring that it remains a pillar of justice rather than a puppet of political influence.
If Nepal’s legal profession is to survive with dignity, its professionals must demand accountability, transparency and independence. The next generation of legal practitioners must work toward rebuilding the credibility of the Bar Association. A law profession tainted by politics, greed and favoritism cannot serve justice. Nepal’s judiciary and legal fraternity must urgently address these issues before it is too late. The Bar Association should not just be an institution for lawyers—it should be a beacon of justice, ethics and integrity in Nepal’s legal landscape.
The author is a member of the Supreme Court Bar and has been practicing corporate law for around three decades
