About the Author
Hashim Ak is a fourth-year BBA LLB (Hons) student at Government Law College, Kozhikode, with a keen interest in legal research, writing, and contemporary legal developments. As a legal researcher and content writer, he has authored book chapters, research papers, articles and blogs on contemporary legal issues.
Introduction
Law is often described as an instrument of justice, but justice cannot be genuinely accessible if the law itself remains difficult to understand. Legal rights and obligations may exist on paper, yet their practical value is diminished when ordinary citizens cannot comprehend what the law requires, permits or prohibits. Complex terminology, unnecessarily long sentences, archaic expressions and excessive technicality can create a distance between the legal system and the people whom it is intended to serve.
In this context, plain language drafting has emerged as an important component of modern legal education. It does not mean reducing law to simplistic or informal language. Rather, it seeks to communicate legal rules with clarity, precision, coherence and accessibility while preserving their intended legal meaning. The objective is not to make law less rigorous, but to make it more understandable.
This issue has gained particular significance in India following the Bar Council of India’s December 2025 decision to integrate “Drafting of Legislation” and “Plain Language Drafting” into Paper 21-Drafting, Pleading and Conveyance under the Rules of Legal Education, 2008. The reform reflects an important shift in the conception of legal education: future lawyers should not merely learn to interpret complicated legal texts; they should also acquire the ability to communicate legal rules and rights in a manner that citizens can understand.
Thus, plain language drafting is not simply a drafting technique. It represents a broader commitment to accessible justice, effective legal communication and citizen-centred law.
Understanding Plain Language Drafting
Plain language drafting refers to the use of language that communicates legal rights, duties, procedures and consequences in a manner that is clear and comprehensible to its intended audience.
A common misconception is that legal language must necessarily be complicated because law itself is complex. This assumption is problematic. Complexity in the underlying legal issue may be unavoidable, but complexity of expression is not always necessary.
For example, instead of stating:“Notwithstanding anything contained hereinbefore, no person shall, save as otherwise expressly provided, be entitled to…”
A drafter may, where legally appropriate, formulate the rule more directly:“A person is not entitled to…”
The second formulation is easier to understand without necessarily changing the legal substance.
The purpose, therefore, is not simply to replace difficult words with simple words. Plain language drafting involves examining sentence structure, organisation, logical sequence, defined terms, active voice, unnecessary repetition and the relationship between rights and obligations.
The Indian government’s legislative drafting guidance similarly explains that plain language aims to improve clarity, precision and reduce ambiguity while making legal information more accessible. Importantly, it recognises that plain language does not mean removing necessary details or oversimplifying the law.
Why Plain Language Matters in a Democracy
In a constitutional democracy, citizens are not merely passive recipients of law. They are holders of rights and participants in the legal and political order. For citizens to exercise their rights effectively, they must have a reasonable opportunity to understand the laws that govern them.
This creates a direct relationship between clarity of law and the rule of law.
If legislation is excessively obscure, several problems may arise:
- citizens may not understand their legal rights;
- individuals may fail to comply with legal obligations because they do not understand them
- access to legal assistance becomes more important even for relatively simple matters;
- vulnerable communities may face greater difficulty navigating legal procedures;
- administrative discretion may become harder to scrutinise;
- andthe gap between law and society may widen.
Therefore, accessibility of law is not merely a matter of good writing. It has implications for equality, accountability and democratic participation.
The SARAL initiative of the Vidhi Centre for Legal Policy, for instance, approaches simplification through the principles of Simple, Accessible, Rational and Actionable Law, emphasising that legal drafting should communicate the law effectively rather than merely follow traditional drafting conventions.
Plain Language Drafting and Legal Education
Legal education traditionally places considerable emphasis on reading judgments, learning statutes, understanding doctrines and developing analytical reasoning. These skills remain indispensable. However, the ability to communicate the law effectively is equally fundamental to legal practice.
A lawyer may understand a complicated legal provision perfectly but still fail to communicate that understanding effectively to a client. Similarly, a law student may be able to reproduce a statutory provision in an examination but may not know how to draft a clear legal notice, legislative clause, contract or policy document.
Legal education must therefore move beyond a predominantly interpretive model towards a more comprehensive model combining:
Legal knowledge + legal reasoning + legal drafting + legal communication.
Plain language drafting can play an important role in achieving this transformation.
The BCI’s 2025 Curriculum Reform
A particularly significant development in India is the Bar Council of India’s December 2025 reform concerning Paper 21-Drafting, Pleading and Conveyance.
According to the report published by SCC Times on December 16, 2025, the BCI announced the integration of “Drafting of Legislation” and “Plain Language Drafting” into Paper 21 under Schedule II, Part II(B) of the Rules of Legal Education, 2008.
The decision followed consultations involving the Legislative Department, Ministry of Law and legal educators. This reform is significant because it recognises that a modern lawyer should possess not only the ability to interpret legislation, but also the ability to draft legislation and legal documents clearly.
The reported changes specifically envisage two areas:
1. Legislative Drafting
Students are expected to develop an understanding of how policy objectives can be translated into legislative provisions, including basic drafting of primary and subordinate legislation.
2. Plain Language Drafting
Students are expected to learn techniques through which legal and legislative texts can be made more comprehensible while preserving their legal accuracy and effect.
The reported implementation framework is particularly noteworthy. Among the mandatory drafting exercises, at least five are expected to focus on legislative drafting, while at least five conveyancing exercises are expected to involve the application of plain-language principles. Students are also expected to demonstrate the ability to redraft legal texts in plain language without altering their legal effect.
This represents more than a syllabus modification. It signals a change in the philosophy of legal education.
From Learning the Law to Communicating the Law
The BCI reform raises a fundamental question: What should a law graduate be capable of doing?
A law graduate should certainly be capable of interpreting statutes and analysing precedents. But professional competence also requires the ability to communicate those legal conclusions to different audiences.
Consider three different audiences:
The Judge
A judge requires precise legal submissions supported by authority and structured reasoning.
The Client
A client may require a straightforward explanation of:
- What happened?
- What is my legal position?
- What options do I have?
- What risks exist?
- What should I do next?
The General Public
A citizen may simply want to know:
- What does this law mean?
- Does it apply to me?
- What are my rights?
- What must I do to comply?
The underlying law may remain the same, but the method of communication must change according to the audience.
Consequently, plain language drafting teaches law students an important professional skill:
audience-sensitive legal communication.
Legal language sometimes requires technical terminology because particular words have established legal meanings. Terms such as jurisdiction, consideration, indemnity, mens rea, res judicata or natural justice cannot always be replaced by ordinary words without losing their legal significance.
Therefore, the objective should not be: “Make every legal word simple.”
Rather, it should be:
“Use the clearest language capable of accurately expressing the intended legal rule.”
This distinction is crucial.
Plain language should eliminate unnecessary complexity, not necessary legal precision.
The Legislative Department’s drafting guidance similarly recognises that plain language must preserve critical details and legal accuracy.
The Role of Law Teachers
The successful implementation of plain-language drafting depends substantially on how law schools teach it.
Simply adding the phrase “Plain Language Drafting” to a syllabus will not be sufficient.
Students must be given opportunities to practice, critique and redraft legal texts.Law teachers could introduce exercises such as:
Statutory Redrafting
Students receive a complex statutory provision and rewrite it in clearer language while preserving its legal effect.
Client Communication
Students convert a legal opinion into a one-page explanation for a non-lawyer client.
Legislative Drafting
Students convert a policy proposal into a basic legislative provision.
Comparative Drafting
Students compare an original provision with a plain-language version and identify whether the legal meaning has changed.
Plain-Language Legal Notices
Students draft notices that communicate rights, duties and consequences without unnecessary legal jargon.
Such exercises can transform drafting from a theoretical subject into a practical professional skill.
Plain Language and Access to Justice
The strongest argument in favour of plain-language drafting is its relationship with access to justice.
Access to justice is often understood in terms of courts, legal aid, affordability and procedural accessibility. But there is another dimension that deserves equal attention, Accessibility of legal information itself.
A person cannot effectively exercise a right that they cannot reasonably understand.
This is particularly important for individuals who cannot afford extensive legal assistance. It also matters for communities that experience linguistic, educational or technological barriers in accessing formal legal systems.
Plain-language drafting cannot eliminate all barriers to justice. A simplified statute does not remove poverty, legal costs, institutional delays or procedural complexity.
Nevertheless, it can remove one important barrier:
unnecessary linguistic complexity.
In this sense, plain language should be understood as one component of a broader access-to-justice framework.
Plain Language, Technology and the Future of Legal Information
The importance of clear drafting becomes even greater in the digital age.
Citizens increasingly access legal information through:
- government portals;
- search engines;
- mobile applications;
- legal databases;
- AI-powered tools;
- social media;
- and online legal-information platforms.
The Government’s 2026 revamp of the India Code Portal illustrates this broader movement towards citizen-centric access to legislation.
The revamped portal includes enhanced search and navigation, AI-assisted and semantic search, speech-enabled access and multilingual capabilities, with the stated objective of making law easier to discover and use.
Technology, however, cannot completely solve the problem of complex legal language.
An AI system can locate a provision more efficiently, but if the provision itself is unnecessarily convoluted, the underlying accessibility problem remains.
Therefore:
Accessible technology + accessible drafting = stronger access to law.
Plain-language drafting can consequently complement developments in legal technology.
Challenges in Implementing Plain Language Drafting
Despite its advantages, several challenges must be recognised.
1. Fear of Losing
Legal PrecisionDrafters may hesitate to simplify language because they fear that changes in wording could alter legal meaning.
2. Entrenched Legal Culture
Traditional legal drafting has developed over decades. Lawyers and institutions may continue using conventional expressions simply because they are familiar.
3. Complexity of Legislation
Certain areas of law involve genuinely complex concepts. It may not always be possible to express them in very simple language.
4. Multilingualism
India’s linguistic diversity presents both an opportunity and a challenge. Translating a legal concept into multiple languages requires consistency of legal meaning, not merely word-for-word translation.
5. Insufficient Practical Training
If plain language remains limited to classroom theory, students may not develop genuine drafting competence.
These challenges demonstrate that plain-language drafting requires institutional commitment rather than merely individual preference.
Towards a New Culture of Legal Drafting
The long-term objective should not be to create a separate category of lawyers who specialise in “simple language.”
Instead, clarity should become a normal expectation of legal drafting.
Law schools can contribute to this transformation by incorporating plain-language principles throughout legal education.
A student studying constitutional law, for example, can be asked to explain a constitutional provision to an ordinary citizen. A student studying contract law can draft a consumer-friendly contractual clause. A student studying criminal law can explain the legal consequences of an offence without unnecessary jargon.
Such exercises would make students conscious of an important professional responsibility:
The lawyer is not merely a custodian of legal knowledge;
the lawyer is also a communicator of law.
Critical Perspective: Is Plain Language Enough?
Although plain language is an important step towards accessible justice, it should not be treated as a complete solution.There is a danger of assuming that if laws are written simply, the justice system automatically becomes accessible. That would be an oversimplification.
Access to justice also depends upon:
- affordable legal representation;legal aid;
- efficient courts;
- accessible procedures;awareness of rights;
- institutional accountability;
- translation and multilingual access;
- digital accessibility;
- andeffective implementation of laws.
Plain language therefore should be regarded as a foundation rather than a destination.
The ultimate objective is not merely to produce simpler documents. It is to create a legal system in which people can find, understand and exercise their rights effectively.
Conclusion
Plain language drafting represents a significant opportunity to reshape the relationship between law and society. Legal rules derive their authority from the constitutional and legislative processes through which they are created, but their effectiveness ultimately depends upon their ability to guide human conduct.
A legal system that communicates only with lawyers risks creating unnecessary distance between citizens and the law. A legal system that strives for clarity, while retaining precision, strengthens transparency and democratic participation.
The BCI’s 2025 decision to incorporate Legislative Drafting and Plain Language Drafting into Paper 21 is therefore an important development in Indian legal education. It acknowledges that tomorrow’s lawyers must not merely know the law but must also possess the ability to draft, explain and communicate it effectively.
The reform should consequently be understood as more than a curricular adjustment. It represents a broader shift from law as a technical language understood primarily by professionals to law as a public instrument that should, as far as possible, be intelligible to those whom it governs.Plain language will not solve every problem of access to justice. But it can remove one unnecessary barrier between citizens and their rights.
Ultimately, the principle is simple, a law that people can understand is a law that people are better able to use, question and uphold. And that makes plain language drafting not merely a matter of style, but a meaningful step towards accessible justice
