Counsel Ethical Considerations for an Advocate's Digital Presence
The Bar Council of India Rules restrict advertising and solicitation. They do not require you to be invisible. The distinction matters.
Rule 36 of the Bar Council of India Rules prohibits advocates from soliciting work or advertising, whether directly or indirectly. That restriction is real and it shapes everything we do. It does not, however, mean an advocate cannot have a website.
What the Rules permit
Following the 2008 amendment to Rule 36, advocates may furnish website information such as their name, address, contact details, enrolment number, professional and academic qualifications, and areas of practice. A clear, accurate, factual website is therefore not only possible but expected of a modern practice.
Information is permitted. Solicitation is not. Good digital work stays on the right side of that line.
What we deliberately avoid
We do not publish testimonials soliciting work, claims of success rates, comparisons with other advocates, fee advertising for the advocate's services, or language that invites clients to engage. Content is educational, factual and written so that the advocate can review and approve it before anything goes live.
Where judgement is still needed
Social media, paid promotion and media coverage sit in greyer territory and should be approached conservatively. Each advocate remains responsible for their own professional conduct, so our role is to build a presence that informs, and to flag anything that could read as solicitation before it is published.
This article is general information about digital practice and professional conduct. It is not legal advice.
