Another push for a Contempt of Court Law

At a time when the subject of contempt of court has led to increased public discussions in Sri Lanka, a private member’s Bill by an opposition parliamentarian to ‘define and limit the powers of certain Courts’ in punishing for contempt, has been tabled in Parliament.

The Bill also provides for the regulation of procedure in this regard. Some clauses are similar to a draft Contempt of Court Act prepared by a team of public interest attorneys and published by the Human Rights Commission of Sri Lanka in 2004, which draft was thereafter revised in 2006 and adopted by the Bar Council. Though it was formally presented to the Government at the time by the Bar Council, no action was taken on it thereafter.

But departing from previous consensus, this Bill has several additions grafted to the text that are undeniably controversial. Notably, it includes ‘scandalising’ the court as part of the contempt offence, despite this long becoming obsolete in common law jurisdictions. Lawyers familiar with this area of jurisprudence would know that, as far back as the 1980s, Lord Diplock in delivering a ruling of note, (Defence Secretary v Guardian Newspapers, 1985), observed that, ‘ the species of contempt which consists of scandalising the judges is virtually obsolescent in England and may be ignored.’

We may look closer at home in understanding these dangers. Though India has had a contempt of court law for some decades, that has not prevented abuse of contempt provisions. Just last year, the Indian Supreme Court found that a senior advocate had ‘scandalised’ the Court in criticising the Chief Justice. Faced with a serious backlash, not only from the Bench but also from retired judges and the public, the Court then backtracked by limiting the sentence of contempt to one Indian rupee.

Meanwhile, the Sri Lankan Bill appears to have also dropped the clause that a journalist may not be held guilty of contempt of court for refusing to disclose sources of information. In the United Kingdom, a 1981 law prohibits courts from ordering media personnel to disclose confidential sources except when disclosure is necessary in the interests of justice or national security or for the prevention of disorder or crime (Section 10). These are standard protections that a 2021 draft on contempt of court should surely contain.

In line with previous drafts, this Bill, however, protects fair and accurate reports of judicial proceedings, fair comment and limits the sentence on contempt to simple imprisonment of six months and/or a fine of Rs 10,000. Certainly, these are good developments.

The need of the hour is for its contents to be suitably amended and for Sri Lanka to enact a good Contempt of Court law that benefits the judiciary as well as citizens of this land.