2023-08-11
A month or so earlier, it was a lawyer practicing mainly in a High Court closer to Colombo, that contacted me and told me of his concerns about a draft Bill which has been discussed amongst his colleagues to do with the introduction of a draft of a contempt of court Bill. He had received a draft copy and said that he, as well as several of his colleagues, were highly concerned about this draft law.
His main concerns as I gathered from the conversation were relating to the right of cross examination of witnesses by lawyers and also making submissions on issues which may sound at times controversial on matters that arise in the course of judicial proceedings. He narrated several instances in which he thought that there were unnecessary pressures to limit the cross examinations and without justifiable reasons. Often, he said that he had been threatened that action will be taken against him for what he sincerely believed to be the exercise of legitimate duties on behalf of his clients.
Similar concerns have been expressed by some lawyers practicing in other courts. Whether such fears are well-founded or exaggerated is not the issue that is being discussed in this article. What is of utmost importance is that there should not be such grounds for lawyers to feel reluctant to exercise their functions freely and that it be a rule without fear or favour.
Many of the provisions of the draft Bill create a reasonable suspicion on the possibility of the contempt of court law being used for purposes other than what the law is supposed to achieve within a rule of law system. Under the common law, the area covered by contempt of court is a very limited area. This limited area is to ensure that court proceedings in particular cases can be conducted in a decent and sober atmosphere without undue pressures or threats to the courts directly or indirectly. Directly, such attacks can happen to a judicial proceeding if there is an attempt to deliberately disturb the proceeding through behaviour that cannot be justified through any rational meaning. Indirectly, the offence can be committed if indirect pressures are being brought to influence the judgement of a court by attempting to build up public opinion or other pressures that may interfere with the free and independent exercise of their functions by the Judiciary or anybody who is working on behalf of the judicial system.
However, the draft bill goes at a tangent on all sorts of things far beyond this narrow scope. Instead of contempt of court, sometimes, other terms are used as the administration of justice or the respect of the courts and the like, which could bring considerations far outside the scope of the offence of contempt of court.
Read more: https://www.themorning.lk/articles/ATTlLabyBjYgx2OsZ2fr