Controversial Oath Taking - 'False' Pupillage: A Senior Attorney Alerts the Chief Judge

A letter addressed to the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, Bibi Rehana Mungly-Gulbul, by a Senior Attorney raises questions about the circumstances surrounding the oath of a new lawyer in December 2025. The matter has been referred to the police to investigate whether a crime of "swearing a false affidavit" has occurred.

The young lawyer swore an affidavit claiming to have completed her pupillage under the Senior Attorney. In his complaint to the Chief Justice, the Senior Attorney asserts that the young lawyer, a resident of Grand-Baie, was presented during the oath-taking ceremony at the end of December 2025 as having undergone her pupillage in his firm. He emphatically states that this was never the case.

According to him, a lawyer approached him in 2024 to accept the young lawyer as a "pupil." He agreed on the condition that she would spend most of her training time in his firm. However, the young woman "never attended his firm during her 'pupillage,'" he claims. The Senior Attorney also mentions that the lawyer had asked him, around June 2025, to sign a letter certifying that the 'pupillage' period had been completed at his firm. He made it clear that he refused, stating he has "never signed a certificate of convenience" throughout his career.

Surprisingly, the Senior Attorney learned after the ceremony that the young lawyer had nonetheless taken her oath based on her claim of having completed her pupillage with him.

After trying to reach the lawyer, the Senior Attorney discovered that another attorney had eventually signed the letter affirming that the young woman also completed her pupillage with the Senior Attorney. This other attorney informed him that he had been told that he was unwell and unable to sign the document himself, which led to the signature on the document.