Explaining Contempt of Court

Courts are the ultimate form of justice for citizens living in a democratic country and thereby held in a higher esteem. The need for contempt of court is not only fair but necessary to protect the status of judges and ensure compliance with the orders of a court. Contempt of court in Pakistan is primarily regulated under two different frameworks, namely the Constitution of Pakistan, 1973, and the Contempt of Court Ordinance, 2003. Article 204 of the constitution deals with contempt of court in the case of a High Court or the Supreme Court, while the 2003 ordinance deals with contempt in lower courts as well.

Defining Contempt of Court

The major reason for initiation of contempt of court proceedings is to preserve the authority of a court and prevent parties from bringing the courts or a judge into ridicule. Three kinds of contempt are covered under the legal framework: civil contempt, criminal contempt, and judicial contempt.

Contempt of court is defined as “to disobey or disregard an order, direction or process of court which a person is legally bound to obey; wilful breach of an undertaking given to a court; any act intended to or which tends to bring the authority of the court or the administration of law into disrespect or disrepute and to obstruct, interfere, or prejudice the process of law or the due course of any judicial proceedings falling within the category of contempt of court.”

Punishments

The law empowers a court to punish a person for contempt of court, where the defendant may be punished by up to 6 months in prison, a fine that may extend to 100,000 rupees, or both. Despite the clarity in the law, a question that often arises is whether a party reporting contempt has the right to pray that the court issue directions to the defendant vis-à-vis the case in which the alleged contempt occurred.

Section 5 of the 2003 ordinance relates to the punishment and reads as follows:

1. Subject to subsection (2), any person who commits contempt of court shall be punished with imprisonment, which may extend to six months’ simple imprisonment, or with a fine which may extend to one hundred thousand rupees, or with both.
2. A person accused of having committed contempt of court may, at any stage, submit an apology, and the court, if satisfied that it is bona fide, may discharge him or remit his sentence.
3. In the case of contempt having been committed, or alleged to have been committed, by a company, the responsibility therefore shall extend to the persons in the company, directly or indirectly, responsible for the same, who shall also be liable to be punished accordingly.
4. Notwithstanding anything contained in any judgment, no court shall have the power to pass any order of punishment for or in relation to any act of contempt, save and except in accordance with subsection (1).

The fact that an accused person genuinely believes that he has not committed contempt and enters a defense shall not detract from the bona fides of an apology.

The Role of the Complainant

It must be noted that the law does not extend any power to the court to issue further directions or issue orders on the merits of the case. Furthermore, in the landmark decision of Sikander Ahmed v Muhammad Aslam Kambohw, Justice Shahid Waheed rightfully noted the relation between the complainant and petitioner in contempt proceedings. His lordship held that contempt proceedings once initiated become a matter between the court and the alleged contemner and it is the discretion of the court whether to punish or pardon him. However, the position of the complainant or the petitioner is reduced to a mere informer.

In another recent ruling, the court reiterated its position and held that once contempt proceedings are filed in court, the matter is solely within the court and the contemner, and it does not need to satisfy the demands of the informer. Thus, it may be rightly said that the court can merely punish the contemner/defendant if he fails to obey the order or decree of the court; it may either find the person guilty or discharge him and nothing else.

It must also be noted that a party reporting contempt for non-compliance with the order or decree of the court may seek implementation of the same, however, it goes beyond the nature and spirit of contempt law. If the purpose of reporting disobedience of the order was to seek its implementation, the right step is to file for execution. Contempt proceedings provide no vested right to any aggrieved party to press for enforcement of decree. An aggrieved party may apply for further directions and it would also act like an executory decree.

---

If you want to submit your articles and/or research papers, please check the Submissions page.

The views and opinions expressed in this article/paper are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect the editorial position of Paradigm Shift.