Publication: The Sunday Times, p 37
Date: 15 June 2008
Headline: What Qualifies As Contempt Of Court
Singapore lawyer Amolat Singh
says some of his friends have been
puzzled by a phrase they have been
reading in the newspapers: "con- 1
tempt of court".
Do people get into such trouble
because they do not have a lawyer
to plead their case, they ask him.
Or does it have something to do
with not properly addressing a
judge in court?
The phrase has come up in reports about opposition politician
Chee Soon Juan, 46, and his sister
Siok Chin, 42, who were recently
given jail terms of 12 and 10 days respectivelyby a judge for "scandalising the court".
The Chees had represented
themselves.
A senior lawyer with 15 years of
experience, Mr Singh readily takes
such questions in his stride. After
all, contempt of court is rarely reported here.
The reason the Chees were
found to be in contempt was not related to the fact that they had represented themselves or that they may
not have known how to address
the court, he said. Others have
gone to court without legal counsel
and have come away unfazed by
court procedures, he added.
Mr Singh and other lawyers that
The Sunday Times spoke to stressed
that contempt of court is a very seri-
What qualifies as contempt of court
ous matter in any country where
the rule of law is paramount.
This is because when judges
make decisions, these must be seen
to be fair. Their decisions can be appealed against but not in a manner
that attacks their authority.
As law professor Eugene Tan explained, "contempt of court" covers all conduct, inside and outside
the court room, that defies the authority or dignity of the court.
He said contempt-of-court conduct can be broadly divided into
four categories:
Interfering deliberately with the
court proceedings and their outcome. Examples of this would be intimidating or bribing witnesses or
the judge;
C o n t e m p t in the face of the
court. Using abusive or threatening
language or creating a disturbance
in court are examples of this;
Scandalising the court. This includes conduct that goes beyond
reasonable criticism and amounts
to attacking the integrity of the
court and undermining the adrninistration of justice;
Interfering with the administra-
tempt of court,
tion of justice. Disthe easier - and
obeying court ormore practical ders and breaching undertakings
solution would
be to send him
given to the court
would fall into
out of the courtthis category.
room.
The crucial
He added:
point is that such
"Judges know
conduct interferes
that coming to
court isn't like
with the administration of justice
coming t o a
and undermines
birthday party.
the reputation
People have
and standing of
grievances, heated words may be
the judiciary and
exchanged, toes
the rule of law,
said Prof Tan.
Teo Cheng Wa
may be stepped
"The definition
on.
is deliberately
"But they
broad, so as to cover the innumera- won't throw the rulebook at them
ble ways in which the authority immediately. Usually there will be
and dignity of the courts can be un- warnings, and the offender will usudermined," he noted.
ally apologise or back off."
In fact, judges - despite having
such broad powers - have generally Exampkr
of contempt
been very tolerant.
Mr ~ & g hgave a hypothetical exis most cornample: Someone's cellphone repeat- CO~TEMPTof
edly rings while he is in court. A]- monly seen when court orders are
though the judge can theoretically defied. At the Family Court, people
cite the offending person for con- are cited for contempt almost daily,
Source: The Straits Times O Singapore Press Holdings Limited. Permission required for reproduction.
such as when a man fails to pay
maintenance in a divorce case.
Another example of defying a
court order would be releasing details about a young victim of a sex
crime when a judge has prohibited
it to protect the child's identity.
As for scandalising the court,
which the Chees were found @ty
of, lawyers estimate that such cases
happen only once in a few years.
In such cases, typically, someone persists in attacking the character of a judge. These cases get reported in the media too.
Chee had been cited before for
scandalising the court; he was sentenced to eight days in jail for the
offence in 2006. His latest citation
makes him likely to be the first person to be convicted twice for such
an offence.
The latest charges against him
and his sister were due to their behaviour during a three-day hearing
last month to assess damages in a
defamation suit brought against
them by Prime Minister Lee Hsien
Loong and Minister Mentor Lee
Kuan Yew.
Justice Belinda Ang, who was
the judge, cited the Chees for 15 in-
stances of contempt. These included accusing her of pre-judging the
case and "rubber-stamping" every
application made by the lawyer for
the Lees.
Chee's 12-day jail sentence is
the stiffest given here so far for contempt by scandalising the court.
However, in the High Court,
where he was charged, there is no
maximum limit set on the length
of the jail term or fine that can be
imposed, the lawyers noted.
In the Subordinate Courts, the
maximum jail term for contempt is
six months or a fine not exceeding
$2,000, or both.
Prof Tan notes that no one is
above the law, and even lawyers
can be cited for contempt -as long
as the person's conduct undermines the authority of the court, or
interferes with the administration
of justice.
"What is often misunderstood is
that in a case of contempt of court,
it is not the court or judge per se
who is offended," he said.
"It's the due administration of
justice that is being undermined
and threatened."
Said criminal lawyer Subhas
Anandan: "When you accuse the
judge of bias, you accuse the whole
system of justice. It's a very serious
allegation."