This interview has been published by Namrata Singh and The SuperLawyer Team
Hello, and welcome to the new episode of SuperLawyer. Today, we have with us an esteemed fellow and Program Director at DAKSH, Surya Prakash BS Sir. Welcome, Sir, and thank you for agreeing to meet with us and give this particular interview to SuperLawyer YouTube channel.
Thank you so much, Divya ji. I’m happy to be part of it. I’m looking forward to this conversation and sharing my journey.
Let me begin with Sir’s journey about DAKSH, a civil society organization that undertakes research and activities to promote accountability and better governance in India, which almost all of us try to find in society.
Now, I would like to begin this interview with a very small question: When did you decide to become a lawyer? Why did you decide to become a lawyer after having such an amazing career as a CA since the year 2000?
So, I was a Chartered Accountant, working in the IT industry on the corporate side. After I started getting into tax litigation and handling tax matters for these companies, I realized the importance of having knowledge of the law, not just tax expertise. Law is such a broad field that I believe everyone should have some understanding of it. It’s like arithmetic—it’s as fundamental as reading and writing.
In modern society, law should be a necessary subject for all of us to be aware of in some form or another. And this is especially true when you’re dealing with a complex topic like taxation. Taxation is not for everyone—it’s a highly technical subject. But when it is applied and administered by officials, and adjudicated by generalists like judges or lawyers, it takes on a life of its own.
That’s when I realized that you need to be able to speak the language of these other communities. It was a very intellectual realization that led me to choose to study law. I thought, “There’s something on the other side of the river; let me explore it and see how much more enjoyable it might be.”
Sir, given that fact, you have transitioned from being a CA and absolutely successful career and then to law. And you have also been the program director at DAKSH. You have led many, many initiatives, like rule of law project and setting it up in the law and technology department at IT Delhi. How do you see these projects aligned with your vision for the future of India’s legal landscape? What are your plans regarding that?
I’ll take a few minutes to address this, so please bear with me. This is a very important question, and many of us may not fully grasp the gravity of the situation.
As India matures and transitions from a middle-income to a high-income society, we need strong institutions. Our society is evolving—from an agricultural-based economy to an industrial, and now a technological income-based society. During this transition, many aspects of our society are creating friction. Personal lives are being disrupted, people are being uprooted due to migration and environmental changes, and there is a constant clash between the haves and the have-nots.
In this journey as a nation, I believe that what will hold us together—apart from each of us individually becoming more enlightened and aware of our motivations—are strong public and governance institutions. These institutions need to withstand the rise and fall of the tides of time and the pressures of street politics. The key question is, how do we maintain our integrity and distance ourselves from these pressures?
With that objective in mind, the rule of law project at DAKSH was initiated by a group of people, including Harish Narsappa, now a Senior Advocate at the Karnataka High Court, and Kishore Mandiam, one of the active members of the team. I joined the project in 2015. As we began working, we realized that while systemic change and strong institutions are crucial, it is equally important to engage with the citizens on the ground. What do they want? What are their expectations? How do they perceive these institutions?
Our perspective has always been focused on systemic change and institutional engagement, but from the citizen’s perspective. This approach has been our guiding principle over the years. We do not reject any perspective—whether sociological, economic, systems thinking, or technological. All these are tools that we should use appropriately to make change possible. One significant advantage of technology is that it allows for scale; it overcomes geographical and physical limitations, making it a very attractive tool. However, it must be used carefully and appropriately, which is always a challenge.
When we were contemplating how to use technology and analytics, an opportunity arose for us to partner with IIT Delhi, leading to the establishment of the center there. We look forward to many more collaborations with other institutions and engaging in impactful initiatives.
So, sir, given your background, you have also co-edited the book called Technology and Analysis for Law and Justice. How do you see technology and analytics playing a role in improving access to justice and enhancing legal outcomes? I would like to also add to this, how do you foresee it is going to change our legal justice system? The problem is, that we have to first understand how technology is infiltrating our lives as well. We would love to hear your views.
I think the answer to the question is evident in the fact that we’re speaking seamlessly with each other, despite being in different cities. Technology has integrated so well into our lives that sometimes it feels too comfortable. The fact that technology is so ingrained in our day-to-day functioning, yet seems somewhat out of place in the legal and justice space, highlights a bridge that needs to be crossed. Technology can significantly impact all aspects of law and justice, whether it’s access to law, information about your rights, or finding out who the appropriate agency is for your situation—whether it be a paralegal, a law firm, a lawyer, or an NGO that can assist you. All these entities support a citizen’s journey from being aware of their rights to enforcing them. I believe that is the foremost priority.
Everything else should be viewed as assisting the citizen in that process, whether it involves law firms that have embraced AI and databases or courts that are now starting to integrate technology. It is also true that the courts are fairly downstream in this process. For example, if a hypothetical Zomato order ends up in court, it is at the very end of the transaction chain. So, courts will always be in a reactive mode when adopting technology, but this needs to happen sooner rather than later.
India has an advantage here. It’s similar to how mobile penetration in India scaled up much faster than in some Western countries because landlines had not yet penetrated deeply. Likewise, many courts in our country do not even have desktops, so moving to the next generation of technology—whether it’s video conferencing, text-to-speech features, or other advancements—becomes much more feasible because the starting point is essentially zero.
There’s no need to convince anyone on the impact of technology; lawyers who are attuned to the needs of citizens are already aware of it. They use WhatsApp, and people expect updates on WhatsApp, QR codes for payments, and so on. All of these are becoming integral parts of our lives, and they will naturally flow into the court systems in the days to come. I have no doubt about that.
The challenge for us is to ensure that this transition is done in a structured manner, with the citizen at the center of it. We need to focus on the design, accessibility, and, in parallel, like with all institutions, how to maintain accountability and transparency. For example, does the use of video conferencing compromise the principle of open courts? The purpose of an open court is to be seen as part of society, but if links are only accessible to a few, how compliant are we with that principle? These are the aspects that require serious engagement from all of us.
Our book, Technology and Analytics, co-edited with Professor Nomesh Bholia, the head of the center at IIT Delhi, who has done significant work on operations research and optimization, addresses these issues. The efficiency of court functioning is an area that needs substantial improvement, and techniques from other sectors need to be brought into the justice system. The journey of writing this book was fantastic, and it includes some excellent chapters.
Many people are aware of the impact of technology, but fewer understand the importance of analytics. We have consciously used the term “analytics” instead of “artificial intelligence” because the latter can seem somewhat conceited. Some experts we consulted recommended using the terms “algorithms” or “analytics,” which is why we chose the latter. I hope readers will pick up the book to understand the reasoning behind this choice.
Sir, considering the various approaches, particularly the citizen-centric approach you’ve mentioned, it’s evident that this perspective would lead to a different way of handling the transition within the legal system. Your background is primarily in the corporate sector, and you have extensive experience in tax controversy management, a very unique and niche field.
How have these experiences shaped your views and approach in embracing a citizen-centric perspective? It’s quite distinct, transitioning from a corporate background to an NGO setting and adopting that mindset. How have you managed that transition? We would love to hear your thoughts on this.
I was fortunate that the leadership at DAKSH at that time found it appropriate to give me the opportunity to be here. However, the thought process was seeded much earlier when I was in a corporate role where we had to manage a lot of complicated litigation.
We had these trackers and Excel sheets with case numbers, years, dispute amounts, chances of failure or success, next hearing dates, and the expected final outcomes. You would jump onto a call with large companies, speak with management, and they would ask, “Okay, when is this matter likely to end?” I understood why they needed to ask, but the reality was that I didn’t really know when it would end, because that’s the nature of the Indian justice system. This made me think more deeply about the courts, how they function, and how difficult they are to understand for people unfamiliar with them.
Fortunately, at that time, I was also taking a course at Takshashila on public policy, where quantitative methods were one of the topics I found particularly interesting. I tried applying these methods and wrote a few blogs using them. Coincidentally, I came across an op-ed in The Hindu by Sudhir Krishnaswamy, who is now the Vice Chancellor of NLS Bangalore. He wrote about the work of a Harvard researcher who pioneered using quantitative methods to study the Indian Supreme Court. I found this very interesting and thought, “Yes, this is exactly what I’m talking about!” He discussed how the distance from Delhi impacts appeal rates, among other things.
I decided to write a cold email to Professor Sudhir Krishnaswamy. I introduced myself, mentioned that I had read his op-ed, and found it very interesting. I shared that I had some ideas and asked if I could come and discuss them with him. To my surprise, he replied to my email and connected me with his team. I visited them, and we shared ideas. One thing led to another, and I was introduced to the team at DAKSH—Harish and Kishore—who were also working on using quantitative methods to understand the justice system. I started volunteering with DAKSH, which was a big eye-opener for me and helped me gain a more systemic perspective on things.
At that point, I was contemplating my next career move, and I felt that if something as significant as the Indian justice system needed to be talked about, researched, and studied for the benefit of the nation, then there was no better time than now to do it.
Around that time, there was also a Law Commission report by Justice A.P. Shah—the 245th Law Commission Report. For the first time, they had extensively used numbers to understand the system. I wondered, “Why hasn’t this been done before? If this is the first such effort, imagine what more can be achieved.” This solidified my decision to move into this field on a full-time basis. So, this is my full-time job now, working on DAKSH projects.
Sir, you also have worked a lot in advocacy and community building. How do you engage the stakeholders who are involved to drive them into meaningful changes that can be brought in the legal ecosystem in India, as well as worldwide, because India cannot only be seen in a jurisdictional format now, now that we are entering into a digital world, and almost all of the tech-related laws are built on universal laws?
So how do you see the kind of changes that we are looking forward to and how do you make sure that people understand these things as well?
It’s not easy at all. I think we all need to start with the expectation that there will be resistance and pushback because the status quo will be disturbed. People will be pushed out of their comfort zones, and existing methods and ways of working will be disrupted. Once we begin the conversation with that expectation, it becomes easier to navigate the next steps.
The tools—well, it’s wrong to simply call them tools. It’s really about conviction. It’s about communicating convictions, sharing ideas, and figuring out who on the other side connects with them. It’s about listening for echoes in society. While we can do all the planning we want, ultimately, it’s about finding people who resonate with your way of thinking, who share your vision, and who understand that this is a path they need to tread. It’s about recognizing fellow travelers when you see them. So, it’s as much about understanding yourself as it is about understanding others.
There’s a fantastic line that I sometimes hesitate to use: there are people who claim to be doing advocacy, and then there are people who are actually doing advocacy. Sometimes, those who seem to be doing advocacy really are. When I say advocacy, I don’t mean just advocates and lawyers, but those who are advocating for change in the system. It’s a very fine line to tread, and you have to be humble. You have to be understanding of various perspectives and try to bring as many people along with you as you can. It’s very difficult to say, “I did this, and therefore this happened.” That linear equation does not exist, especially in society and particularly in the field of law and justice, which is just one subsystem within the larger complex adaptive system that is society. To claim that one action directly led to another is a very tenuous argument. It’s possible, and if you’re lucky, it might happen. I can clearly say I’ve been fortunate to have been part of some of these moments, but it doesn’t happen to everyone or every time.
In that context, given the global surge in using technology across everything, India cannot remain isolated. India will have to learn how to adapt to this situation. I believe there’s a strong case for India to take the lead in many areas. Many countries recognize this, and we’ve seen this with initiatives like UPI and DPI—other countries are now waking up to the fact that there are newer ways of building systems that can benefit society at large. India should strive to take the lead in many of these domains, particularly in law and justice, where I believe we have a huge opportunity, especially given that developments in other countries are not very encouraging from an overall social perspective.
I guess sir, India is the front-runner when it comes to AI and its usage in social upliftment.
That’s what I understand from the ethical perspective and the think tanks with whom I’m involved. I would like to ask that question also, if you allow me to, that since we are front runners in terms of ethics, morality, and spirituality, and we are trying to understand these concepts and the world is trying to understand it as well, along with us.
How do you see that this is going to take us as a country as a legal framework? And how do you see that society is catching up to it? Because law as always has been told everywhere that it catches up with technology, but technology runs forward. Do you see any time sooner that we will be having similar kinds of laws, which will be much more enforceable, even without a lot of gaps?
Because researchers are going on to understand how these things are going to take shape when it comes to, let’s say, driverless cars. And given the kind of population that we have, will that become a reality anytime soon for us with obviously all the implications?
I would break that question into two parts: how does law catch up with technology? And more generally, how does law catch up at all? In India, we haven’t been particularly strong in adapting law to technology. We’ve been reactive, very reactive. As you rightly pointed out, this reactivity is common in most countries, but it’s fair to say that we might even be lagging behind many other countries in this regard.
If I were to make an educated guess, I would say that where laws directly impact citizens on a personal level, we will see legislation emerge more quickly, whether it’s related to health, food, or other immediate concerns. Take the example of BT cotton; you’ll recall the significant pushback against it. So, when we talk about technology, we need to use the term more broadly, including areas like our environment.
In some cases, you will see more direct resistance and quicker legislative action. But where the impact of technology is more removed from individuals—one or two steps away—you’re likely to see a slower response. This brings me to the broader issue of laws being reactive to social expectations. Social norms, conventions, and practices eventually need to be translated into law.
However, I believe that feedback loop is not very strong in India. It’s often either the government preemptively making decisions or interest groups pushing their agendas. The general lawmaking process in our democracy hasn’t fully matured. There’s a lack of widespread consultations, and we rarely see solid research reports backing the introduction of new laws. There’s also little study on the impact of existing laws.
This is why I predicted earlier that when laws affect individuals personally, election cycles will ensure a quicker response. But in other areas, the pushback might be slower. This isn’t necessarily good or bad, but it’s something we need to be mindful of. As a society, we should think critically about the processes and mechanisms we need to strengthen to meet societal expectations.
How do you view the new generation of learners entering both the legal and technology fields? With technology law now becoming a significant reality in India, what advice would you give to these new entrants? What kind of plan or timeline should they consider? How should they approach their careers, especially considering that our legal system is evolving and the movement towards technology is gaining momentum?
We would love to hear your suggestions on how these newcomers can get acquainted with these changes. How do you see these new norms coming into play, and how can everyone adapt to the integration of technology into the legal field?
Actually, I think this is a very good question. We’ve been trying to think about a curriculum or a reading list aimed at bringing lawyers together, and I believe it’s best to start with where you are. Any person joining law school today has already been using mobile devices for the last three to five years.
So, begin with that. What laws govern WhatsApp? What are the legal rules around posts on WhatsApp, Instagram, Facebook, or Twitter? If I create a post on Instagram, what material can I use? What laws govern that material? If I tag someone, and it’s not a very nice tag, what are the consequences for me?
I would urge law students who are entering the course to start with these daily experiences and build from there. If they are curious, keen, and diligent, it will naturally lead them to understand constitutional rights and institutional mechanisms. But starting with something as simple as breaking down the mechanics of a mobile phone is essential.
I wouldn’t recommend textbooks or other formal books, especially for this purpose. Start with your experiences. For example, when you do a Paytm or UPI transaction, what are your rights if it doesn’t go through? If there’s a dispute, what are the mechanisms available?
I believe that thinking along these lines will be far more educational than compiling a list of textbooks and research articles.
The practical perspective you’re suggesting often raises the question: the way we are educated and the way we are trained in practical life are two completely different worlds. Once we step out of college, we realize we’re entering a new world, and we have to learn everything from scratch.
Sir, you’ve always been busy developing your career and contributing to societal systems. But outside of these professional endeavors, what personal hobbies or interests do you have? How do you balance these with your busy legal and corporate life?
I have always made time for my interests, and I encourage everyone to dedicate time to something beyond their professional life—something just for themselves, something that nourishes the soul and the body. It’s super important to keep that priority straight.
Recently, I’ve discovered the benefits of physical activity—maybe it’s age catching up with me—but I’ve taken up swimming, and I strongly encourage as many people as possible to do the same. Aside from that, I’m really into reading books. Sometimes it feels fashionable to say that, but I read books that can’t be finished—and I mean that in a good way. The classics, which you can keep revisiting at any time. I read a lot of classical Indian literature in Kannada, Sanskrit, and English.
I also read many traditional Indian texts, which I find very useful. Art and music are big parts of my life as well. I’m open to all types of music, and it plays a significant role in helping me unwind and shift my mood, depending on how the day goes. I think music is an important element to have handy—you never know when you’ll need it.
Wow, sir, you are so humble in sharing these insights. Considering how lawyers typically unwind, especially the new entrants I’ve interacted with—they often wonder how anyone finds time for hobbies when they’re focused on earning a living. I sometimes struggle to answer when they ask how they can make time for such things.
Given that, what suggestions do you have for the new generation of legal professionals and researchers who are eager to make a meaningful impact in this field but feel restricted by various challenges? How can they find new ways of learning and approaching life and their careers?
I think it’s a very important point, and something I’ve recently been considering more deeply. There isn’t a straightforward answer, as a lawyer’s income depends significantly on the domain they work in. If that domain is thriving, clients will naturally be able to meet the needs of the lawyers. For instance, if you work on high-level transactions like corporate M&A, you will generally be compensated more. Conversely, if you’re involved in areas less relevant to current major deals, your income will reflect the section of society and the economy you are serving.
It’s crucial to understand that the fees you earn from traditional advisory work are influenced by the economic sector you serve, which also has its own business cycles. What was highly lucrative two decades ago might not be as appealing now. Therefore, I believe there’s an oversupply of law graduates in the market. While they are highly skilled and intelligent, it’s important to build additional skills adjacent to legal expertise. For example, writing skills can be valuable in various roles, logical thinking can be applied in numerous situations, and crafting arguments can be useful in diverse contexts.
I would strongly recommend exploring how these skills might transfer to other domains. Many legally trained professionals have succeeded in other sectors, demonstrating the applicability of their legal training beyond traditional legal roles. For instance, having a deep understanding of constitutional law provides a unique perspective on how institutions function, which is a valuable skill that can be applied in many other areas.
I don’t claim to have fully answered your question, but I can honestly say that I would advise my child, if they chose to pursue law, to view it as a means to learn how to learn, rather than committing to a lifelong career in law. If a career in law happens, that’s great, but it’s also important to be open to applying the skills learned to different situations and continuing to grow.
Wow, Sir! You answered the question in a nuanced way, and your suggestions are absolutely fascinating. Choosing wisely is crucial. Looking ahead, and without taking much more of your time. Could you share what you see as the most pressing challenges or opportunities in India’s journey toward a more equitable and efficient judicial system? How do you plan to address these with your involvement with so many prominent organizations in India?
I have no doubt that it is only by coming together that we can make a difference. The path forward for all of us is to identify and connect with a purpose larger than ourselves. As a nation and as a society, we have reached a point where our basic needs are, to a large extent, fulfilled for many people.
As lawyers, it is crucial to identify a purpose beyond oneself and strive to achieve it. This could involve advocating for particular rights, making courts and laws more accessible, or increasing public awareness about possible legal actions and legal aid.
Consider what you can contribute and remember that this mindset is valuable in corporate settings as well. When legal opinions are sought for business purposes, keeping the larger context in mind is essential. Without this perspective, legal advice may remain a mere pedantic exercise. Identifying and connecting with a larger purpose is vital for future generations and for everyone.
I strongly recommend finding a group of people who share similar values and becoming part of that community. At DAKSH, we are engaged in many interesting projects and look forward to collaborating with others who share our enthusiasm for these initiatives.
Whether as professionals, young professionals, or students, there is much to be done collectively. Our journey has only just begun, and we have numerous ideas for what could be accomplished. I am happy to share these ideas with those who are interested.
Thank you so much, sir, for your thoughtful interview and for extending an invitation for us to connect and build our own community to better serve society. Once again, thank you for your time and for listening to us. I’m your host, Divya Dwivedi, and I extend my gratitude to Surya Prakash sir for being here and giving us so much of your time.
Thank You
Get in touch with Surya Prakash B S-
