The proposed one-year LLM course replacing the two-year Masters from the next academic year has not gone down well with the senior faculty of conventional universities as they see it a ploy to favour the National Law Schools edging out products of traditional law schools in teaching posts.

A committee headed by the former Vice Chancellor of National Law School of India University, Bangalore, N.R. Madhava Menon, has submitted a report to the University Grants Commission (UGC) recommending one-year LLM to retain the talent going to foreign countries and attract them to teaching in law schools.

Apparently, teachers and stakeholders in the 960-odd conventional law schools were not involved in it, and they say only the future of National Law Schools was kept in mind.

“There should be broad-based consultations and study of impact analysis while proposing such a major change. Unfortunately, nothing of that sort was done here,” says G.B. Reddy, senior Law faculty and former Principal of OU College of Law. He says the specialisations are so vast in Law that a two-year course is must for Masters.

“The present LLM course has eight to 10 subjects. How many subjects will they study? When will they work on the project they need to submit?” Dr. Reddy asks. “The appointment of the Madhava Menon committee was done with the sole object of facilitating the entry of Law graduates from National Law schools, who pursue one-year LL.M from US and UK universities, into law teaching posts in national universities,” he feels.

Other senior teachers remind that the purpose of a Masters is to acquire in-depth knowledge, and the one-year course will be superficial. They remind that even the 14th report of the Law Commission has commented on the half-baked lawyers being produced in the country in the present structure. In such scenario, the one-year LLM will further dilute standards, they allege.

Teachers say it was yet another ill-conceived move of the then HRD Minister, Kapil Sibal, who insisted on the changes. He made similar attempts with engineering and medical entrance exams, and they all landed up in legal problems. “Though the idea is good, changes have to be brought in only after due consultations,” they say.

Positive side

A section of teachers, however, feel the move will encourage research in law and thus attract more people to teaching. They say the three-year and five-year courses are good enough for practicing law and that in a majority of countries LLM is just one-year course. It is also pointed out that most aspiring and talented law graduates are moving abroad to study in foreign universities instead of the Indian law schools to save that one year.

‘It will facilitate entry of law graduates from National Law Schools into teaching in universities’

Purpose of a Masters is to take in-depth knowledge, and the one-year course will be superficial