Why UILS’ intra moot needs reforms (Or any other competition for that matter)

DISCLAIMER: I don’t write this with any hate but with a simple view to improve the system that we’re a part of. It is merely a dialogue engaging article. Please don’t read this any further if you are not open to new ideas or don’t appreciate constructive criticism for systems already set in place.

So UILS (that’s the place where I study) holds an ‘Intra Department Moot Court Competition’ (fancy, eh?)every year. For those from a non-legal background- a moot court is a competition wherein the students are given a hypothetical case and are asked to argue the same in a hypothetical court as lawyers. So far so good.

A moot court is a simulation of actual court proceedings.

But here comes the catch- every year in the preliminary rounds for the first and the second year the criteria for getting selected is that you need to win from both sides (from the complainants and the defendants) AND also your score should be in the top 8. Sounds quite okay if you ask me. But is it really?

I mean you have almost a hundred teams participate every year- most of them having 3 members in their teams. 100x3. That’s 300 students participating which is a LOT. But out of them you only select…8? Even though 16-18 teams win both of their rounds generally. Well, the top 8 scored the highest. Why the fuss, you ask?

Because the system is a bit unfair. Top 8, kudos to them. Really. But the point is- the marking of judges, even if you provide them with a basic bifurcation of marks, is pretty subjective. What is good enough for one judge may not be good enough for the other. However, if despite all of that some teams win both of their rounds; I personally believe that all of them deserve a second chance. 

The criteria for selections is a bit unfair if you ask me.

Why? Because these are all beginners- first years and second years who’re experiencing a moot for the first time and we should encourage them because an intra moot is the only place they will gain the confidence to further try out national moots. If you’re going to dishearten them in the first place itself that yes, you did win your both rounds but your scores weren’t as high as the other teams who were judged by different judges, they are never going to think they can be good enough.

Not because they are going to take it completely negatively but because in a scenario of a 100 teams, space for only top 8 will ensure only the cream gets out and the rest, even despite their best efforts will not get an opportunity to groom themselves.

The intra-department moot court is an annual event- that’s like only one chance, shouldn’t you give as many chances as you can to the students during this time? Most of them are doing their first moots and inspite of that if they emerge victorious in both of their rounds, they should be given another chance. Marks be damned. 

And it’s not just that, it’s also a peer pressure thing. Your friends see you working for the moot day and night, relentlessly. Flagging your memorials and compendiums, compiling reports of all kinds and when you don’t get to the next round (despite the fact you won both of your rounds but MARKS) they make fun of you. And it really causes a lot of resentment. We are in college, opinions do shape up how we tend to think about ourselves. 

Researched a lot? Won both your rounds? Sorry, your scores aren't enough!

Why did I not write this any sooner? Because I did not understand how the system worked until I was at the center of it. And also because I saw a lot of resentment amongst my juniors after the results were announced and I know somewhere deep inside they were right.

And since it is an annual event and the only annual event we do really look forward to, I guess these are some little changes that are the least the Mooting Society and the authorities can do for us.