Ms. Shriya Maini has a plethora of achievements and has made her mark not only in litigation, but also in pedagogy and writing. Few excerpts of her candid conversation with Desi Kaanoon.
Q. You have mentioned that being an unabashed feminist, you particularly enjoy Criminal Litigation. Why do you feel Feminism and Criminal Litigation are inter-related?
A. Feminism in law is the advocacy of women’s rights on the fundamental ground of equality of sexes, which I believe is extremely important vis-à-vis the oppression and tyranny women are still subjected to. Why villages and small towns, see the Courtrooms in metropolitans including Delhi. I myself have been subjected to a snarky smile, contemptuous laugh or maybe a harmless snigger the moment I enter a sea of black robed men. Without a doubt, the criminal litigation scene is dominated by men today – women senior lawyers can be named on their finger-tips infact. Before I get to really answering the question, the trick and advice is to be like a workaholic ostrich and gather all relevant information/knowledge that you can from colleagues and senior lawyers across the Bar.
Now, the interplay between feminism and criminal litigation is very interesting when viewed qua the Indian Criminal Justice system today. Look at the IPC for instance or even the CrPC – Many offences (rape), special laws (POCSO – Protection of Children against Sexual Offences Act) and the procedural laws (CrPC – The Criminal Procedure Code) and their corresponding punishments including bail provisions find a strong link with Feminism where women are treated as a special gender. The substantive and procedural criminal laws comprehend the need for protection of women, especially in a country like India. The Criminal Law Amendments Act, 2013 post a Nirbhaya or a post Kathua change in the criminal laws assumes grave importance in understanding how criminal litigation and feminism run hand in hand. Today, as we speak, the convicts are to be hanged on the 22nd, all thanks to the feminist media uproar which has molded the wheels of the way the Indian criminal justice works. We have fast track courts, death penalty for gang rape or a man who rapes a woman under 12 years of age and not just minor (below 18 years). So, yes, indeed feminism has and continues to influence the criminal litigation system profoundly.
Additionally, I can see that a lot of freshers venturing into litigation as compared to previous years, and especially young girls are very keen to explore the professional worksphere of criminal dispute resolution. Being a feminist, I am devoted to be a part of the revolution earnestly praying that more and more women are encouraged to be a part of this field of criminal law and litigation. Understanding feminism to precisely mean equality of one and all, without specifying any gender is perhaps, the best prism to view it from.
Q. Having judged many acclaimed national and international moots including Price Media and Jessup, you would have encountered both convincing and annoying mooters. How far is this relevant to the fact that organised moot court programs do not teach students to be good appellate advocates but how to win moot courts?
A. An important question indeed! Firstly, Courtrooms and moot courts are two very different environments and ambience to deal with. By this I mean the tone and tenor of skill sets required are radically different. While a Trial Advocacy Moot could involve strong, assertive and vociferous arguments with a tint of voice modulation, along with reference to a wide variety of sources of law, of course, on the other hand, in an International Moot Court competition, one has to be very particular of the Bench one is addressing. The tone ought to be polite and maybe even monotonous to the extent of not pushing over one’s point. Essentially, Court mannerisms (soft skills) and the style of arguing, apart from the knowledge of case facts and law is key to being a convincing or annoying mooter. Secondly, a lot depends on the Bench too. For instance, a mooter might want to introduce a new argument which hasn’t been addressed in the written Memorandum. This is where Court mannerisms come into play to convince a Bench effectively. I remember my first Intra Rounds at GNLU in 2008 wherein I (being a first year law student who was ever going to argue in a mock court) was pitched against a stalwart mooter of my college – Shubhang Setlur (then and today an excellent litigator!). He had then just won the NUJS Moot and returned home to law school. Almost the entire college had flocked to the courtroom to hear him argue for the Prosecution. He was cheered on and praised by one and all and just as he finished, I saw each and every member of the audience leave. From about a fifty kids, we were left to only three of us in the room – me, my opponent and the time keeper, besides the judges of course. My heart sank but I didn’t lose confidence and decided to give it my best still. I walked on to the podium pretending to be super confident, only to have tactfully relied on my soft skills as a first time mooter. Being a first year student, I wasn’t very well versed with the laws and even then, the Bench marked me pretty high for my poise, style of arguments and earnest effort.
Lastly, in an actual Courtroom, matters do not get dismissed in a single hearing at a time. There is a separate day’s a hearing for arguments on charge, charges to be framed, the examination-in-chief, then another for cross examination probably days and months later. In a moot court, one has to wrap it all up in a span of two hours. Hence, it would be unfair to compare both the scenarios. Besides, the Bench has specific legal pointers in mind based on a script which it expects the mooters to highlight during the course of their arguments, unlike a litigating Courtroom wherein sky is the limit, based upon the Judge’s discretion of course!
Q. Why did you switch to pure litigation from entrepreneurship?
A. I wasn’t a pure entrepreneur ever. I. Infact, I had my heart set out on litigation from the very beginning and I was focused that this is precisely what I want to do. Being at a law firm, I was constantly bothered by the lack of courtroom experience. The thought of not being able to argue and witness hearing in courts prompted me to switch to pure litigation, which I clearly and surely enjoy more that the corporate sector. So as far entrepreneurship is concerned, I am a lawyer in independent practice and I teach over the weekends at various law schools. I am an External Faculty for International Crime and laws of procedure at NLU Delhi and Lloyd Law College. I visit law schools (NLU Odisha, GNLU etc.) almost on a monthly basis, judging moots, taking lectures and training students for course like Supreme Court Practice and Procedure. In the initial years of my practice, I actually had quite a lot of free time to kill in the evenings. So I began writing and blogging (“The Witness Stand” or “International Law Square”) on online platforms about legal issues. My choice to pursue an LL.M followed immediately thereafter, almost as if to explore other options of legal research. I applied to Oxford and Cambridge, and I got a call from both. Oxford gave me the Dr. Mrs. Ambruti Salve Scholarship, which boosted my decision to pursue the BCL since it fully covered by my living, travel expenses apart from my tuition fees. That is what gave my litigation journey an impetus when I returned back home and helped me impart education, looking as though I had taken to entrepreneurship.
But I think I was and am able to do as much for I am a second generation lawyer. I must admit that it was calculated (and maybe marginally easier a) risk for me to leave a comfortable firm job and try my hand at advocacy. In hindsight, it turned out to be the best decision of my life though – be it emotionally, monetarily or morally. I am very aware of the opportunities that I got and get till date because of my father being an active part of the profession and in no way do I feel a sense of entitlement about it. I know I have to work very hard everyday as a lawyer in Independent practice, for I am blessed to have a “Launchpad” which most of the first generation lawyers dream of. This profession is performance oriented and the day I stop delivering my best, someone will replace me and my position within seconds! So I advise everyone to network and utilize whatever contacts they have to the fullest, in terms of looking for a good mentor and guide in the profession to start with, be it family or friends. I would say take up every matter, paid or unpaid, gain as much experience as possible and do all kinds of work (original and appellate) – be it legal writing, drafting, soliciting, pro bono advisory, and that too across all for a – right from the Supreme Court of India to the district Courts. The trick is to learn how to make a file from a single sheet of paper which the client brings to you and entrepreneurial skills indeed come in handy while doing so. Today, when I get requests for internships from law students, I try my best to not refuse anybody for I know the value of such opportunities in the market.
Q. You have pursued your Bachelor-in-Laws from Exeter College, University of Oxford. Please advise students on General and specialised LL.M. courses.
A. A general LL.M. course allows one to pick and mix units, opening the doors to a diverse collection of legal areas. At Oxford, four (4) courses from a list of around forty have to be chosen. As I said, I was awarded the Dr. Mrs. Ambruti Salve Scholarship and the Bodh Raj Sawhney Trust Memorial Scholarship 2014-15 to pursue the BCL (a general Master’s degree course) and I picked Commercial Remedies, International Arbitration, International Criminal Law and Laws of Armed Conflicts. Everyone had a thing or two to say about my choices which were distinctly placed on a spectrum ranging from dispute resolution to International crime. But I have always followed my heart and I loved International Law just as much as I love my practice and procedure subjects. So a general LLM proved to be a blessing in disguise for I was able to pursue such a diverse range of subjects and not be confined to a particular area of law such as only arbitration or criminal laws. Today, I practice as well as teach almost all the four subjects mentioned above!
A specialized LL.M., however, covers very specific, at times niche topics related to the concerned subject, with the aim of giving the law students an in-depth knowledge of that particular area – for instance Competition Laws or Intellectual Property Rights. Postgraduate students who are already practicing or soliciting in the field could be more suited to a subject specialization to complement the area of law in which they work, or in which they intend to progress/practice. So if you already work in the concerned legal sector, or this is the next step for you after your studies, then a specialized LL.M could plausibly be a sensible choice. So take a close look at the course structure, content covered, and assessment criteria for your shortlisted law schools and LLM programmes and this will help you make an informed choice.
Q. How would you describe your job under the Cabinet of President Judge at International Residual Mechanism for the Criminal Tribunals?
A. I must start by saying I had the best time ever at the Tribunal! This question makes me very nostalgic indeed. All thanks to the Oxford Global Justice Award for Public International Law (more specifically my Professor Mr. Dapo Akande) and the Judge who was a visiting faculty during my Oxford days, I was awarded a special fund to work at the Cabinet of the then President of the Tribunal – Judge Theodor Meron. The Mechanism for International Criminal Tribunals (“MICT”) seated at The Hague, Netherlands is a body of the United Nations (a court of law) designated with the task of carrying forward the legacy of the ICTY and ICTR (International Criminal Tribunals for the Former Yugoslavia and Rwanda), which are now defunct. The Tribunal works on a mix of civil and common law elements and thus, the experience was fantastic for me for I interacted with lawyers from diverse backgrounds – Lebanon, Italy, America, Turkey, Scotland. Additionally, I saw the interplay of International Humanitarian Laws, Human Rights Laws and International Criminal Law i.e. how these laws play out in practice. My work ranged from drafting opinions, written memoranda, case law notes for the Judge to legal research, cite checking and proof reading judicial orders and judgements. International work experience teaches you time management, attention to detail and team play. However, the major take away from this opportunity was that I was exposed to a completely new area of law called International Criminal Law which I now teach as a Visiting Faculty at National Law University, Delhi and Lloyd Law College, Noida over the weekends. So, a big thank you once again to Oxford, Judge, Dapo and of course, the MICT!
Previous Post: https://desikanoon.in/learn-about-courtroom-skills-ll-m-courses-and-more-with-advocate-shriya-maini/