Law firms in India increasingly require a publication listed on a candidate’s CV, a criterion that has left many graduates with extensive courtroom experience unable to secure interviews.
Publications dominate the short‑listing process
Law school libraries during exam periods reveal a common sight: students hunched over research papers they have written primarily to add a publication to their resumes.
When asked about the content, many struggle to summarize it, and their motivation is often summed up as “because it looks good on the CV.” This trend reflects a broader shift in legal education where a brief, possibly low‑quality article can outweigh months of practical litigation work.
One recent graduate, who completed internships involving cross‑examinations, client meetings, and drafting applications under tight deadlines, reported being rejected eleven times by top‑tier firms. The sole missing element on his application was a publication. Several firms now include a mandatory “publications” field on their online forms, turning the requirement into an automated gatekeeper that filters candidates before a recruiter even reviews the rest of the file.
Related: Jupitice launches digital document signing solution
Why a paper is easier to assess than courtroom work
Hiring committees often screen hundreds of applications for a handful of positions. In a 30‑second glance, a title, journal name, or ISSN number provides a concrete data point, whereas the substance of a three‑month litigation internship is harder to quantify. This efficiency advantage explains why many firms favor publications, even when they recognize the need for well‑rounded candidates.
The pressure to publish has spawned a market of journals that will accept almost any submission, sometimes for a fee. India’s University Grants Commission (UGC) discovered that nearly 90 percent of nominated journals lacked credible editorial boards, peer‑review processes, or verifiable histories. The practice of paying for quick acceptance continues, turning a CV line into a transaction rather than a scholarly achievement.
In practice, a paper can demonstrate clear thinking and writing ability, but it does not reveal whether a candidate can handle the “ordinary chaos of legal practice.” The ability to survive tight deadlines, interpret detailed contractual language, and sense when a client is withholding information are skills forged in real‑world settings, not in solitary research.
Nevertheless, firms argue that publications are a reasonable proxy for independent research and structured writing, qualities that are otherwise difficult to assess at scale. The problem arises when the proxy becomes a substitute for genuine competence, especially when many of the publications involved are of questionable merit.
Related: Jingtian & Gongcheng adds four partners across three offices
A practical solution could involve changing interview questions. Instead of asking “how many papers have you published,” recruiters might ask candidates to describe a specific problem solved during an internship.
Legal recruitment aims to identify future lawyers, yet the current system often rewards a résumé full of publications over one rich in courtroom exposure.
This misalignment can lead firms to hire candidates who appear ready on paper but require additional training once they begin practice, ultimately costing firms time and resources.
Addressing the issue will not happen overnight, but acknowledging that many listed publications are not genuine research is a necessary first step. The focus should shift from treating publications as a shortcut to evaluating the real abilities that make a competent lawyer.
