Contempt of Court and Free Speech

Paper Summary:

In this article, the writer notes that the mindset of the law-makers in the U.S. gave way to the making of the Constitution, and more importantly the inclusion of an entire chapter that would particularly safeguard the rights and interests of the people against all other authorities in the country. These were known as the Fundamental Rights, which would cater to the needs of the average man in the country, thereby providing him respite even in the face of the highest authority in the nation if his rights were to be violated in any instance. With regard to the topic of contempt of court and free speech, the writer looks at the debate between the will of a higher authority that is the judiciary and the most basic yet unavoidable right of the common man, i.e. the right to freedom of expression. Since the project topic seems to be a conflict between the two, the researcher first defines or throws light on what both of them hold. The researcher then discusses both the aspects of this issue, thereby trying to draw a conclusion with regard to what finally over-rules; authority or right.

Outline:
Introduction
Chapter 1- Contempt of Court: A Punishable Offence
Chapter 2- Freedom of Speech: A Fundamental Right
Chapter 3- Contempt of Court vs. Free Speech
Chapter 4- Position of the Indian as well as English law in the context of Contempt of Court
Conclusion

From the Paper:

"The present case is one of critical analysis and amazement as to how irresponsible and callous the media can be, in the pretext of doing their job. The fact that such media persons do not understand the implication of their publications, attacking and impugning the very integrity and character of the judges, is indeed, a very disgraceful thing to happen in the context of freedom of speech and expression. Nevertheless, in all this process the publishers got what they wanted- intense publicity and profits at the expense of a panel of a few judges. And all the judiciary did in this respect was to let them off on the basis of a tendered apology. This does send negative signals to the mass at large, that might start thinking that they can say and do anything they want to in the exercise of their freedom of speech and expression, and can get away with the same by tendering false apologies to the Court, to escape punishment. In this way, not only did the reputation of the judiciary suffer a blow, it also did not succeed in meting out proper justice to the wrong-doers by simply letting them loose."

Sample of Sources Used:

• Lowe Nigel, Brenda Sufrin, The Law of Contempt, 3rd Edition, 1996, Lexis Nexis, Butterworths.
• Pal Samaraditya, The Law of Contempt (Contempt of Courts & Legislatures) [ As Amended by the Contempt of Courts Amendment Act, 2006], 4th Edition, 2006, Wadhwa & Company, Nagpur.
• Pal Samaraditya, The Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, 1992 Edition, Law Research Institute, Venus Book Distributors.
• Ramachandran V.G, Contempt of Court, 4th Edition, 1976, Eastern Book Company, Lucknow.
• Jain M.P., Indian Constitutional Law, 5th Edition, Rep. 2007, Wadhwa & Company, Nagpur.

More papers on Contempt of Court and Free Speech:

• Essay # 71684 : "Robert Goldstein's "Flag Burning and Free Speech"
• Essay # 63166 : "Public Order and Free Speech"
• Essay # 91001 : "Flag Burning and Free Speech"

APA Citation:

MLA Citation: