Clinical Legal Education and Access to Justice During and Beyond COVID-19: Some Reflections of Indian Experience

Abstract

Legal education aims to impart legal skills and training to law students and develop them into professionals who can render legal services. Clinical legal education (CLE) bridges the gap between the theory and practice of law. CLE has dual purposes of imparting lawyering skills to law students and achieving the social justice mission of law. CLE imparts certain skills and values to students for social justice. Students’ involvement in legal aid clinics makes them more justice-oriented, empathetic and ready for social change. With such orientation, they can assume larger leadership roles as ‘social engineers’. The access to justice crisis compels us to think about legal education’s scope and purpose. In this article, we argue that CLE is indispensable for the attainment of access to justice. During the COVID-19 pandemic, students supervised by clinicians at legal aid clinics worked with communities on issues of ‘migration’, ‘health’ and ‘education’. We argue that the COVID-19 pandemic was instrumental in revealing that legal aid clinics can play a larger role in the attainment of access to justice even during ‘normal times’. This article offers recommendations in order to achieve the goal of securing access to justice for the masses.

Introduction

Legal education plays an important role in socializing the next generation of lawyers, judges, and public policymakers. As gatekeepers to the profession, law schools have a unique opportunity and obligation to make access to justice a more central social priority. ²

Deborah L. Rhode has critiqued legal education’s inability to instil in students the professional value of rendering pro bono services to the poor and marginalized persons and embracing the challenge of bridging the ‘justice gap’ in society. Lawyers have a professional responsibility to provide pro bono legal services and law schools must prepare future practitioners to fulfil this duty. The opportunity to engage in pro bono services during law school allows students to develop the necessary legal skills and professional values to commit to public service. However, law schools have largely been complicit in the poor state of access to justice. ³

The pervasive denial of access to justice to millions of people in India due to various socio-economic factors is appalling. ⁴ While the primary obligation of providing access to justice to marginalized sections lies with the government, ⁵ law schools do have a duty to provide solutions to the access to justice crisis. ⁶ Clinical legal education (CLE) programmes in law schools, with their dualistic mission of providing skill-based training to law students and legal services to underserved communities through legal aid clinics, ⁷ are well positioned to provide a solution to the access to justice crisis.

Legal aid clinics incorporate the core mission of serving the legal needs of local communities. ⁸ They serve as lower-cost means for rendering legal aid services which would otherwise remain unmet. ⁹ Legal aid clinics place students face to face with stark inequalities in access to justice and train students to assist low-income individuals and communities. ¹⁰ Working on real-life situations in collaboration with a supervisor makes students share the responsibility of identifying and addressing legal issues. ¹¹

CLE is the most significant innovation in legal education since the introduction of Langdell’s case law method in law schools. ¹² It has enormous potential to improve the quality of legal education. ¹³ CLE is intrinsically a ‘practice-based learning experience’ with the objective of imparting professional lawyering skills to law students and achieving the social justice mission of legal education. ¹⁴ The CLE methodology of ‘learning through doing’ adopted in legal aid clinics prepares students to apply their substantive knowledge of law to varied situations, thus, bridging the gap between the theory and practice of law. ¹⁵ Moreover, ‘experiential learning’ makes them proficient in valuable lawyering skills such as those of legal research, drafting, negotiation, interviewing and client counselling. ¹⁶ In addition, the students become aware of the justice mission of law and become social engineers to champion the cause of rule of law, democracy, access to justice and social justice. ¹⁷

While CLE’s potential to transform legal education and expand access to justice remains undeniable, there is a need for reform. ¹⁸ In recent times, the unprecedented COVID-19 pandemic has in many respects revealed the shortcomings of the traditional models of CLE, which lack innovation, flexibility and the ability to adapt to emergencies. ¹⁹ During the pandemic, clinical faculty were largely left to themselves ²⁰ and had to swiftly adopt creative ways to sustain legal aid clinics to provide legal services and enhance access to justice locally. ²¹ The unchartered territory of the pandemic gave rise to the adoption of a technology-centred approach for legal aid clinics for the betterment of local communities. ²² Thus, clinical programmes largely suffered during the pandemic. ²³

This article argues that CLE is indispensable to the achievement of access to justice in India ²⁴ and reviews the findings from a survey of clinicians sharing their experiences of running clinics during COVID-19 from 2020 to 2022 in some Indian law schools. The findings of the survey are discussed in the relevant parts of this article. It provides an overview of how law schools have tackled the challenges posed by the COVID-19 pandemic in the context of CLE. The authors discuss the impact of law school clinics on local communities with a focus on migrant workers, health facilities and education services during the pandemic. The authors argue that in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic, traditional models of CLE need to be revisited by embracing technology in the day-to-day functioning of legal aid clinics. The article concludes with recommended actions for law schools to provide a ‘good practices’ framework for support to their clinical faculty and students to increase access to justice even in ‘normal times’.

Part II of this article discusses the development of CLE in India from the 1960s, adding some relatively new and notable developments that need to be documented. Part III gives an account of the experiences of the functioning of clinics in law schools in India during COVID-19. Part IV carries the recommendations and Part V concludes the article. The survey questionnaire for clinicians is included in the Appendix of the article.

The Evolution of CLE

As early as 1901, the introduction of CLE was proposed by a Russian professor, Alexander Lyublinsky, who believed that a clinical component could be developed in law schools on similar lines as in medical training. ²⁵ But it was not until 1917 that proposals for the development of clinics started emerging in the United States. ²⁶ The development of CLE in the United States was propelled by the American civil rights movement and public interest movements in the 1960s and 1970s, which focused on eliminating poverty. ²⁷ Lyndon Johnson, former President of the United States, in 1964, waged a war against poverty and established the Equal Employment Opportunity Act, 1964, which funded several legal aid programmes. ²⁸ Since then, CLE has become an integral component of the curriculum in almost all the law schools in the United States. ²⁹

During the 1960s–1970s (also in the 1980s), when the clinical movement was gaining momentum in the United States, law clinics were established and developed in several countries, including India, the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, Botswana, Tanzania, Chile, Peru and Argentina. ³⁰ Throughout this period, the Ford Foundation funded the establishment of clinics at several universities in the United States. ³¹ The Ford Foundation funded major initiatives in CLE outside the United States, in countries such as India, ³² South Africa, Chile, China and Bangladesh. ³³ CLE was introduced in law schools in India in the 1960s with the purpose of generating socially relevant lawyers who would strengthen the rule of law, justice, equality and increase access to justice. ³⁴

Despite several measures taken by different stakeholders over five decades, CLE continues to remain in the nascent stages of development in India. ³⁵ Promoting and strengthening CLE is a desirable objective to prepare socially relevant legal professionals and to make law and its mechanisms more accessible to the masses. ³⁶ Key stakeholders, including legal educators, lawyers, human rights workers, NGOs and activists, have been tirelessly working towards promoting social justice through developing, strengthening and orienting CLE. ³⁷

In India, when the legal aid movement gained momentum in the 1960s, it was widely believed that law schools would play a vital role in rendering free legal services to the weaker sections through the establishment of legal aid clinics. ³⁸ Some of the institutions that are credited with establishing legal aid clinics early on are Delhi University, Benaras Hindu University, Aligarh Muslim University, Renukacharya Law College, Bangalore and Government Law College, Calicut. ³⁹ In the beginning, the involvement of faculty and students in most of these legal aid clinics was considered to be a voluntary activity. There was no reduction in workload for clinical faculty members, and students were not awarded credits for their participation in legal aid clinics. Nonetheless, students were attracted to the legal aid clinics in large numbers. ⁴⁰

Between the late 1970s and early 1990s, several committees on legal education reform emphasized the need for experiential learning in law schools. The Expert Committee Report of 1973 followed by the 1977 Juridicare report emphasized the importance of involving law faculty and students in providing legal services to the poor. ⁴¹ In 1980, under the chairmanship of Justice P.N. Bhagwati, the Committee for Implementing Legal Aid Schemes (CILAS) evolved a scheme to monitor and implement legal aid programmes in India. ⁴² In accordance with the recommendations of CILAS, the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987, was enacted to fulfil the constitutional promise of access to justice. ⁴³ In 1994, a three-member Committee on Legal Education, comprising of Justice A.M. Ahmadi, Justice B.N. Kirpal and Justice Jahganaddha Rao was appointed to suggest reforms to legal education. ⁴⁴

In part, the formalization of CLE in India began with the circular issued by the Bar Council of India (BCI) in 1997, mandating law schools to introduce four practical papers from the academic year 1998–1999. ⁴⁵ The four papers are: Paper 1: Moot Court, Pre-Trial Preparation and Participation in Trial Proceedings; Paper II: Drafting, Pleading and Conveyancing; Paper III: Professional Ethics, Accountancy for Lawyers and Bar Bench Relations; and Paper IV: Public Interest Lawyering, Legal Aid and Para-legal Services. ⁴⁶ The BCI prescribed the number and title of courses, the university academic bodies were entrusted with the task of formulating the content of these practice courses. ⁴⁷ Thereafter, in the year 2002, the Law Commission of India in its 184th Report on the ‘Legal Education and Professional Training and Proposals for Amendments to the Advocates Act, 1961, and the University Grants Commission Act, 1956’ recommended that CLE must be made mandatory in law schools. ⁴⁸

Most recently, Hon’ble Mr Justice Sharad Arvind Bobde, former Chief Justice of India, called for a meeting of some of the members of the National Legal Services Authority (NALSA) ⁴⁹ to set up a committee with the objective of including ‘Clinical Legal Aid’ in the curriculum of law schools. The committee in its first meeting on 10th October 2019 deliberated, discussed and debated the issue with the representatives of BCI, Shri Manan Kumar Mishra, Chairman, BCI, Shri Apurba Kumar Sharma, Chairman, Executive Committee, BCI and Professor Manoj Kumar Sinha, Director, Indian Law Institute. ⁵⁰

During the meeting and pursuant to the suggestion of Hon’ble Mr Justice Sharad Arvind Bobde, a three-member subcommittee was constituted comprising of Shri Vijay Hansaria, Senior Advocate, Supreme Court of India, Professor Ajay Pandey, Professor, O.P. Jindal Global University and Professor Manoj Kumar Sinha to recommend changes to the law school curriculum. The subcommittee deliberated upon the issue and submitted a report dated 18th October 2019 to Hon’ble Mr Justice Mohammad Rafiq, former Chief Justice of the Himachal Pradesh High Court and Chairman of the committee. The committee suggested the inclusion of ‘Legal Services and Legal Aid’ as a compulsory course in the law school curriculum. The report consisted of a draft paper, evaluation scheme and the distribution of marks. ⁵¹

The committee was of the view that the recommendation to include ‘Legal Services and Legal Aid’ as a part of the compulsory undergraduate course for all centres of legal education would motivate students to provide free legal aid services to the marginalized communities. It would also help in achieving the objective of NALSA, which is ‘Access to Justice for All’. The committee decided to seek the approval of the Executive Chairman of NALSA, before sending it to the BCI with a request to place the report before the Curriculum Committee of the BCI. ⁵²

However, and as stated above, despite several measures, CLE is yet to reach its desired potential in India. ⁵³ There are several hurdles to the development of CLE in India. A majority of law schools in India have not formalized clinical programmes. ⁵⁴ Such schools have ‘legal aid cells’, that are often not supervised by faculty members, are voluntary in nature, are student-led initiatives, and students do not receive any credit for their involvement in clinics. ⁵⁵ The lack of trained faculty, inadequate financial resources and limited infrastructure facilities are some of the reasons that limit the growth of CLE in India. ⁵⁶ Another hurdle to the development of CLE in India is that the Advocates Act of 1961 and rules issued pursuant thereto legally prohibit students as well as full-time law professors from practising as advocates in the courts of law. ⁵⁷

Clinicians Experiences During COVID-19

The COVID-19 pandemic in March 2020 shook and paralysed the entire world. To alleviate the pandemic infection rate, the Government of India issued an order to close many public places including academic institutions. ⁵⁸ Law schools in India were in a lockdown since March 2020. ⁵⁹ Both academic and support staff were under an order to work from home, and students were instructed to leave campus and study from home. The world moved online, and classes were held on an online mode on platforms such as Microsoft Teams, Zoom and others. ⁶⁰

Before the pandemic, it was unthinkable that online teaching would dominate educational institutions and could be a replacement to face-to-face learning. ⁶¹ However, during the pandemic, all the stakeholders were compelled to adapt to technology to conduct online classes. Though online learning was the only way to continue education for millions of students across the world during the pandemic, it was not devoid of its challenges. ⁶² There was an outcry from both students and teachers when they were forced to rely on online education. Students longed for their campus life and facilities on campus. Some students did not have adequate internet facilities at home and some experienced constant interruptions from family members, during online classes. ⁶³ Teachers also longed for physical classes. They had to quickly change their teaching methods to encourage interaction during class. Moreover, conducting examinations online and their assessment was complicated. ⁶⁴

The development of CLE, which is an integral component of legal education in India, was faced with severe challenges during the pandemic. ⁶⁵ Though law schools continued to teach clinical courses online, the interactions and student experiences were limited to the theoretical understanding of the social justice mission of law due to the inability to conduct field visits and gain practical experiences. ⁶⁶ Clinical courses promote experiential learning, and the purpose of the inclusion of these courses in the law school curriculum was unfulfilled due to the physical limitations imposed by the pandemic. However, the law school-based legal aid clinics emerged as centres of social justice in several law schools, where students independently as well as under clinical faculty supervision used their lawyering skills to promote access to justice on issues like migration, health and education. Students had a positive impact on vulnerable communities during the pandemic. ⁶⁷

Case Study 1: National Law Institute University, Bhopal (NLIU Bhopal)

The COVID-19 pandemic was most insufferable for the vulnerable sections of society. Most severely hit were the migrant labourers, who left their homes and travelled on foot for kilometres without any appropriate transportation support from the state governments to return to their respective states. ⁶⁸ The students at the National Law Institute University, Bhopal launched Mazdoormitra (friend of labourers), a social justice project with the purpose of assisting migrant labourers to safely return to their homes, by organizing e-passes, night shelters and procuring food for them. ⁶⁹ Since all educational institutions, including law schools were shut down during the pandemic, students were compelled to coordinate with each other and with state authorities over WhatsApp to assist migrant labourers. ⁷⁰ The Mazdoormitra website was up and running 24 hours all days of the week and included contact details of various COVID-19 helpline numbers for states and labour welfare agencies. ⁷¹ The students were available to mitigate the situation 24/7 through the website. Within a month of launching the Mazdoormitra initiative, students at National Law Institute University, Bhopal were successful in solving more than 200 inquiries of migrant labourers from across India. ⁷²

In response to the survey questions in the Appendix of this article, clinicians reported that the purpose of their clinic is to promote social justice. The biggest challenge faced by them during the pandemic was the physical limitations. Due to the financial hardships posed by the pandemic, legal aid clinics were unable to receive adequate support from their respective institutions. On a scale of 1 to 10, with 10 being the highest form of institutional support, clinicians rated 5 out of 10 for the support received from their institution. Their clinic focused on assisting migrant labourers in the safe return to their hometowns. WhatsApp emerged as a leading technology to carry out clinical work during the pandemic. ⁷³

Case Study 2: Gujarat National Law University, Gandhinagar (GNLU)

Students and alumni of Gujarat National Law University, Gandhinagar assisted migrant labourers during the COVID-19 pandemic to make their journey back home easier. ⁷⁴ They collaborated with another clinic, Zenith Legal Aid Clinic in Madhya Pradesh in order to provide shelter, food and conveyance to migrant labourers to return to their homes. ⁷⁵ They connected with non-governmental organizations and state governments to assist migrant labourers by providing them with details of train schedules. ⁷⁶ In their first phase, that is, from 14 May to 21 May 2020, the team of students and alumni at the Gujarat National Law University, Gandhinagar successfully assisted 6,000 workers from Madhya Pradesh who were working in Maharashtra and therefore were left stranded due to the pandemic. The team assisted workers who were facing abuse by their employers and were compelled to work extra hours. The team connected the workers with local police personnel, and as a result, the workers were able to return safely to their homes with police protection. ⁷⁷

In response to the survey questions in the Appendix, clinicians reported that the purpose of their clinic is to motivate law students to provide free legal aid services to marginalized communities. The biggest challenge faced by them during the pandemic was the lack of resources to support their clinical work. They rated the institutional support received by them during the pandemic as 7 out of 10, with 10 being the highest form of institutional support. Their clinical work focused on collaborative efforts to ensure that migrant labourers from Madhya Pradesh who were stranded in Maharashtra were able to safely return to their homes. The members of the clinic made use of WhatsApp to deliver on their promises. ⁷⁸

Case Study 3: National Law University, Jodhpur (NLU Jodhpur)

During the COVID-19 pandemic, the Legal Aid and Awareness Committee at the National Law University, Jodhpur was instrumental in organizing ‘Drishti Shakti’, an online training session to create awareness about cybercrimes in India. The training programme brought various stakeholders, namely, the National Commission for Women, Facebook and Cyber Peace Foundation together on one platform to collectively spread awareness about ensuring the safety of women while using online platforms, preventive measures to avoid becoming victims of cybercrimes, such as cyberbullying, and the process of reporting and addressing cybercrimes. The organization of this online training programme proved to be beneficial to institutions, individuals and companies at large.

Another significant measure undertaken by the Legal Aid and Awareness Committee was the organization of ‘informative webinars’ on combating acid attacks, the shortcomings of India’s primary education sector and the issues related to the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals 3 and 16. The webinar on ‘Combating Acid Attacks in India’ was conducted in collaboration with the Chhanv Foundation. During the webinar, both organizers shared the work they had undertaken for acid attack survivors, and there was a discussion on the socio-legal implications of acid attacks. The trauma of being an acid attack survivor was brought to life through the sharing of personal narratives by the survivors.

During the webinar on ‘The Shortcomings of the Primary Education Sector in India’, Mr Ambarish Raj, a renowned and well-known Right to Education activist, shared the condition of the primary education sector in India, the problems faced by students from underprivileged backgrounds during COVID-19 pandemic and the possible impact of the New Education Policy on the primary education sector. He also critiqued the Right to Education Act, 2009, and recommended implementation strategies to work towards achieving its goals in the true spirit.

The webinar on Sustainable Development Goals 3 and 16 was organized by the Committee in collaboration with the Confederation of Young Leaders. During the webinar, Dr Priyamvada Singh, advocate, policy and outreach adviser for Udaan Rajpusht-IPE Global, UK, explained the importance of Sustainable Development Goal 3, regarding ‘good health and well-being’. With the use of case studies, Dr Singh explained the factors which have an impact on the physical and mental health of women and children globally.

Another prolific speaker, Dr Shipra Mathur, founder of MEERA, a platform to promote gender equality, discussed the importance of Sustainable Development Goal 16, which includes, ‘providing access to justice for all’ and highlighted the problem of underreporting of cases of sexual harassment and child abuse in India. She encouraged adolescent girls to report such instances and seek justice from institutions.

In addition, the Legal Aid and Awareness Committee organized the ‘LexQuest Essay Writing Competition’ with the objective of encouraging young students to think and write about contemporary issues, for example, the impact of virtual education on students and the impact of the New Education Policy. The essay competition received over 150 entries from high school students across India.

In response to the survey questions in the Appendix, clinicians reported that the purpose of their clinic is to promote social justice while allowing students to learn lawyering skills. The biggest challenge faced by them during the pandemic was ensuring the safety of their students. They rated the institutional support received by them during the pandemic as 8 out of 10, with 10 being the highest form of institutional support. The members of the clinic focused on organizing webinars to spread awareness about cybercrimes and sustainable development goals. They also encouraged young writers by organizing an essay competition. The members of the clinic made use of WhatsApp, Zoom and social media platforms to support their initiatives. ⁷⁹

Case Study 4: Jindal Global Law School, Sonipat, Haryana (JGLS)

One of the authors of this article, Professor Ajay Pandey, as the executive director for clinical programmes at O.P. Jindal Global University, among other things, initiated a webinar series during the pandemic to promote CLE in India. Between May 2020 and July 2020, nine webinars were conducted on the themes of youth leadership for a tobacco free world, the role of law school clinics in the times of COVID-19, protecting the rights of children during COVID-19, the pandemic and migrant workers: lessons from community lawyering, outlining a refugee law clinic for Indian law schools, the right to health: what ails and what can heal, the role of academic institutions in strengthening anganwadis for early child care, good rural governance and citizen participation, and sketching an environment clinic of a law school. The webinars were enriched by distinguished panellists comprised of academics, scholars, lawyers, law faculty, judges and students involved in clinical programmes. ⁸⁰

The students and alumni of Jindal Global Law School came together to launch the ‘Access to Justice for Marginalized Communities during COVID-19’ initiative for assisting migrant labourers by making arrangements for their food, shelter, medicines and transportation from Haryana to return back to their home states. They coordinated with non-governmental organizations and the state government for the return of stranded migrant labourers to their home state. The students created a WhatsApp group to assist people who needed food and shelter. Through this WhatsApp group, the students worked with local government bodies, NGOs and grassroots volunteers to reach out to the needy. ⁸¹ There were volunteers from the alumni and student community at the JGLS who arranged for hospital beds for the vulnerable sections of society and raised funds to assist the poor and needy with their medical expenses. ⁸² They also conducted online classes for school students, particularly first-generation learners, during the pandemic. ⁸³

The students at the clinic organized online public hearings for the citizens. The dual objective of these hearings was to hear the grievances of the people and provide them with relevant information. The issues that were dealt with concerned access to healthcare service providers, education services, the implementation of the public distribution system and the mid-day meal scheme. The students under the supervision of the clinical faculty acted as a bridge between the citizens and the government to ensure access to government schemes. ⁸⁴

In response to the survey questions in the Appendix, clinicians reported that the purpose of their clinic is to promote social justice, access to justice and impart lawyering skills to the students. The biggest challenge faced by them during the pandemic was the physical limitations. The clinicians rated the institutional support received by them during the pandemic as 8 out of 10, with 10 being the highest form of institutional support. The members of the clinic focused on assisting migrant labourers in returning safely to their home states, creating awareness through webinars and solving grievances through online public hearings. The members of the clinic made use of WhatsApp, Zoom and social media platforms to support their clinical work. ⁸⁵

The impact of the pandemic was felt the most by vulnerable communities in society. If the plight of migrant workers in smart cities during the pandemic does not shake our consciousness, nothing will. ⁸⁶ India has over 1,600 law schools, with thousands of law students capable of translating constitutional guarantees, such as the right to a dignified life, right to equality, right to free legal aid and right to health, into reality. ⁸⁷ The pandemic was instrumental in revealing the shortcomings of CLE programmes in responding to various justice needs of the vulnerable and the disenfranchised.

The experiences of clinicians and students working together in clinics at law schools and their impact on communities reveal that clinics have a much larger role to play in increasing access to justice in India even during normal times. We need to empower legal aid clinics to further strengthen clinical programmes at law schools. Traditional models of CLE have to undergo a change to deliver on the social justice mission of legal education. Legal aid clinics should embrace technology in their day-to-day functioning to promote access to justice in India.

Recommendations

CLE is less firmly integrated into law schools in India. Consistent efforts to formalize CLE in the law school curriculum have been met with limited success. The extent of usage and implementation of the CLE methodology in classrooms is met with severe challenges. Although CLE is being increasingly recognized by law schools in India, we are far away from achieving the desired potential. The BCI’s efforts to formalize CLE through changes in the law school curriculum cannot be underestimated. However, in the absence of leadership and serious efforts by law schools, the full integration of CLE in the law school curriculum remains problematic. ⁸⁸

For instance, a 2011 study of the United Nations Development Programme India surveyed 39 law schools with legal aid cells to assess their functioning. ⁸⁹ The findings of this study suggest that 82 per cent of those law schools had faculty members designated to supervise students at the legal aid cells. However, 63 per cent of them did not award any academic credits to students involved in the legal aid initiatives. The study was instrumental in pointing out that there was no reduction in workload for the faculty members designated to supervise students at legal aid cells. Furthermore, it was reported that sometimes local communities are unaware of the law schools’ initiative of establishing legal aid cells that provide free legal services. ⁹⁰

An empirical study was conducted on ‘Reforming Clinical Legal Education through Collective Action by the Stakeholders’ at the Jindal Global Law School under the supervision of Professor Ajay Pandey. The study resulted in six key recommendations pursuant to consultation with several leading law schools, with robust clinical programmes. The study recommended (i) the promotion of collective action amongst law schools; (ii) the establishment of a law school collective in every region across India. Each region would comprise of at least 20 law schools to collaborate and resolve the social justice scenario in that region and report back on activities, exchange ideas and offer feedback; (iii) law schools in general need to be aligned with the objective of legal aid as provided for in law. Legal Aid has to be perceived as a necessity and law schools are the key stakeholders in providing free legal aid; (iv) full-time commitment of law schools for maintaining consistency, continuity and sustainability of efforts; (v) encourage the involvement of students beyond just the law school community and (vi) convergence of efforts of various stakeholders, including civil society, government and academia. ⁹¹

The COVID-19 pandemic was instrumental in further revealing the challenges faced by CLE and building a consensus for reform. While policy reforms may be introduced by the government in due course, ⁹² the authors of this article offer three recommendations to empower legal aid clinics and make them an epicentre for social justice across law schools, for the development of CLE in India. First, the establishment of a nationwide network of online legal aid clinics to provide free legal services to vulnerable communities. ⁹³ Second, use a ‘good practices’ framework for legal aid clinics. ⁹⁴ Third, establishing and running of legal aid clinics in all law schools in India, without any exception. ⁹⁵

Conclusion

Socially relevant legal education requires planning, strategy, effort and commitment amongst its stakeholders. The pursuers of this vision are bound to act on behalf of the vulnerable communities, the common people of India, the peasant, the labourer and the homeless. CLE is poised to transform legal education in India. ⁹⁶ CLE imparts lawyering skills to students and provides training for the facilitation and delivery of legal services. Students develop humanistic values and are able to apply their learning of law in real-life settings. CLE acts as a bridge between the stark realities of universities and local communities, and students gain exposure to the legal problems of people from backgrounds dissimilar to their own.

Law students may choose to become a part of different fields, including judiciary, litigation, law firms and several others, wherein the practical knowledge of law is going to be of immense value to them. Their career choices are bound to be impacted by their involvement in the clinics. They may even choose to provide pro bono services to people from marginalized communities after graduating from law schools, owing to their experiences of working in law school-based legal aid clinics.

However, the development of CLE in law schools is faced with several challenges. The COVID-19 pandemic was instrumental in revealing the challenges that are faced by traditional notions of CLE as a methodology fulfilling its twin purposes of imparting lawyering skills to law students and promoting social justice. CLE is most suited for delivering the social justice mission of law, however, to fulfil this vision legal aid clinics need to be empowered with technology, infrastructure, suitably oriented and committed faculty members, and adequate resources. Regulators, law schools, law professors and law students have to come together to make legal education more practice-oriented, holistic and humanistic to fulfil the promises of justice, equality and dignity for all.