Lawyer’s vigilance is society’s early warning against democratic erosion, says A.M. Singhvi

A lawyer’s vigilance serves as society’s early warning system against the gradual erosion of democratic values, senior advocate A.M. Singhvi said at Justice Unplugged: Shaping the Future of Law, a law conclave organised by VIT School of Law, VIT Chennai, in association with The Hindu, in New Delhi on Saturday (February 28, 2026).

“Democracies rarely collapse in a single dramatic moment. They erode gradually, through normalised excess, through institutional fatigue, through the slow corrosion of standards. It is the lawyer’s duty to recognise those early fissures,” he said, emphasising that a vigilant Bar constitutes the first line of constitutional defence.

Mr. Singhvi drew attention to what he described as a global phenomenon of constitutional backsliding, marked by deepening polarisation and the erosion of institutional norms. Lawyers, he said, must remain alert to such shifts.

“Around the world, we have seen democracies strained by polarisation, misinformation and erosion of institutional norms. Rarely do these crises begin with tanks on the streets. They begin with subtle distortions, normalising exceptional powers, questioning judicial legitimacy, weakening checks and balances,” he said.

Law as a bulwark for the voiceless

He also urged law students to steadfastly uphold constitutional values. Recalling stalwarts such as Nani Palkhivala, he pointed out that outstanding jurists are remembered not merely for their forensic brilliance in constitutional courts, but for their unwavering fidelity to constitutional principles.

“The courtroom is not a battlefield of egos; it is a sanctuary of reason. To enter it unprepared is disrespectful; to enter it without integrity is dangerous,” he said.

Mr. Singhvi further noted that the law must function as a shield for those without a voice. The true measure of a legal system, he said, lies not in how it treats the powerful when they are secure, but in how it protects the vulnerable when they are exposed. He pointed out that transformative change across jurisdictions has often been catalysed by young lawyers unwilling to accept inherited injustice as immutable.

“In India, public interest litigation expanded access to justice, bringing bonded labourers, under-trial prisoners, environmental degradation and gender discrimination within judicial scrutiny. That movement was not driven by corporate incentives; it was driven by moral imagination,” he said.

‘Selective’ corruption reference in NCERT textbook

Responding to a question from the audience, the senior counsel said a reference to “corruption” in the judiciary in a Class 8 textbook published by the National Council of Educational Research and Training (NCERT) was troubling because of its “selective” emphasis. While acknowledging that corruption exists across institutions, he said the chapter appeared to single out the judiciary without addressing similar concerns within the bureaucracy or the political class.

Earlier, the Supreme Court had registered a suo motu case over the “selective reference” and said it was a “tentatively calculated, deep-rooted attempt” to denigrate the judicial institution.

“…There can be no two views about the fact that there are black sheep in the judiciary, as in every other sector,” he said. “The problem lies in the selectivity of a two-page chapter that, out of the blue, isolates the judiciary without institutionally addressing corruption, which is rampant in the bureaucracy and the political class. It is presented out of context, as if targeting one institution alone. That is a matter of concern,” he said.

He added that the inclusion of the chapter appeared to have been undertaken without due scrutiny and could be construed as an “agenda” to “intimidate” the judiciary.

The chapter titled ‘The Role of the Judiciary in Our Society’ in a Class 8 Social Science book prescribed by NCERT identifies corruption, a mounting backlog of cases, and an inadequate judicial strength as among the “challenges” confronting the justice system. The section on “corruption in the judiciary” in the book states that judges were bound by a code of conduct that governed not only their behaviour in court but also how they conducted themselves outside of it.