Need for a comprehensive law on contempt
India and Pakistan, which emerged as two independent states following the partition of British India in 1947, inherited The Contempt of Courts Act, 1926 (Act No. X11 of 1926). Bangladesh, which was one of the two provinces of the united Pakistan, also adopted this law after its independence in 1971.
The Contempt of Courts Act (CCA), 1926 has only three Sections. Section 1 mentions the title, extent and commencement date of the Act. Section 2 has three sub-sections that briefly describe the power of superior courts to punish contempt of court, while Section 3 specifies limit of punishment for contempt of court.
The CCA, 1926 does not define what is, or amounts to, contempt of court. Actually, the matter has been left to the discretion of the courts. So, any act that a judge thinks to be disrespectful of the court is contempt of court.
Within six years of her independence, India replaced the CCA, 1926, saying that it was "not a comprehensive piece of legislation." The CCA, 1926 was replaced by the CCA, 1952. The scope of the CCA, 1952 was also not wide enough to define what constituted contempt of court.
The 1952 Act was repealed and replaced by the CCA, 1971 on the recommendation of a committee set up in 1961 under the chairmanship of the then additional solicitor general H.N. Sanyal. The recommendations which the committee made took note of the importance given to freedom of speech in the Indian Constitution and of the need for safeguarding the status and dignity of courts and interests of administration of justice.
The CCA, 1971 of India has 24 Sections, which include, inter alia, definitions, the activities that do not constitute contempt, punishment for contempt of court, contempt not punishable in certain cases, appeals, limitation on action for contempt, and power of Supreme Court and High Courts to make rules.
As stated earlier, the CCA, 1926 did not define contempt of court. Section 2 of the CCA, 1971 of India clearly defines contempt of court. While stating that contempt of court means civil contempt or criminal contempt, it elaborates both civil contempt and criminal contempt.
The Act has provided that the following activities shall not constitute offences of contempt:
· A person shall not be guilty of contempt of court on the ground that he has published (whether by words, spoken or written, or by visible representations, or otherwise) any matter which interferes or tends to interfere with, or obstructs or tends to obstruct, the course of justice in connection with any civil or criminal proceeding pending at that time of publication, if at that time he had no reasonable grounds for believing that the proceeding was pending; · A person shall not be guilty of contempt of court on the ground that he has distributed a publication containing any such matter as is mentioned above, if at the time of distribution he had no reasonable grounds for believing that it contained or was likely to contain any such matter as aforesaid; · A person shall not be guilty of contempt of court for publishing a fair and accurate report of judicial proceedings before any court sitting in chambers or in camera except in certain cases; · A person shall not be guilty of contempt of court for publishing any fair comment on the merits of any case which has been heard and finally decided; · A person shall not be guilty of contempt of court in respect of any statement made by him in good faith concerning the presiding officer or any subordinate court to (a) any other subordinate court, or (b) the High Court to which it is subordinate. Notwithstanding anything contained in any law for the time being in force, no court shall impose a sentence under the CCA for a contempt of court unless it is satisfied that the contempt is of such a nature that it substantially interferes, or tends substantially to interfere with the due course of justice. Contempt of Court Ordinance, 2003 read with Contempt of Court Ordinance, 1998 that repealed the Contempt of Court Act, 1976 of Pakistan have, among others, the following provisions:
-The publication of a substantially accurate account of what has transpired in a court, or of legal proceedings shall not constitute contempt of a court;
-Fair and healthy comments on a judgement involving questions of public importance in a case which has been finally decided shall not constitute contempt provided it is phrased in temperate language and the integrity and impartiality of a judge is not impugned;
-No person shall be guilty of contempt of court for making any statement, or publishing any material, pertaining to any matter which forms the subject of pending proceedings, if he was not aware of the pendency thereof.
-No proceedings for contempt of court shall lie in relation to the following:
(i) Remarks made in an administrative capacity by any authority in the course of official business, including those in connection with a disciplinary inquiry or in an inspection note or a character roll or confidential report; and
(ii) A true statement without intent to scandalise a judge regarding his conduct in a matter not connected with the performance of his judicial functions.
-No person shall be found guilty of contempt of court, or punished accordingly, unless the court is satisfied that the contempt is one which is substantially detrimental to the administration of justice.
Socio-economic and politico-cultural aspects of Bangladesh, India and Pakistan are same to a large extent. This suggests that Bangladesh repeal the existing Contempt of Courts Act-1926 and replace it with a new and comprehensive law, particularly in line with the Contempt of Court laws in the neighbouring countries. This will help remove the doubts existing in the mind of the people regarding offences that constitute contempt of court.
Comments