Prashant Bhushan Contempt: UK Lawyers Body Expresses Concern; Says 'Lawyers Entitled To Voice Legitimate Criticism'

Expressing that the Supreme Court's contempt verdict against Advocate Prashant Bhushan amounted to an interference with "legitimate criticism", Bar Human Rights Committee of England and Wales has issued a statement."We are extremely concerned that the Court in reaching its decision did not hold in contemplation that lawyers are entitled to, and should have, the freedom to voice publicly legitimate criticism of how justice is administered", the BHRC said.The UK-based lawyer's body pointed out that the offence of scandalizing the court was abolished in the United Kingdom after it was widely felt that it could have "undesirable effects" on "free speech or legitimate criticism"."The offence of scandalising the court arose in an era where deferential respect to authority figures was the norm and before a human rights framework protected the civil liberties of individuals and enabled the institutions of power to be held properly to account", it said.Calling Bhushan a "regular commentator on political and legal matters", the BHRC said that his tweets and reply affidavit "were part of a widespread debate and critical discussion in the legal community of how the Supreme Court of India – as the protector of the constitution and check on State power – administers justice"."To stymie such criticism risks a chilling effect on an appropriate and necessary debate to advance law reform in a democratic society", the statement read."An independent and impartial judiciary is stronger when enabling open and public debate on its operations", it added.The BHRC urged the Supreme Court of India to: Enable an effective review process of the decisions of the Court to instigate contempt proceedings of its own motion and to convict Mr Bhushan of criminal contempt; Stay sentencing of Mr Bhushan until such review has been conducted; In any event, discharge Mr Bhushan from serving any punishment for the offence, commensurate with the broader context of public debate and the right to freedom of expression and legitimate criticism that the legal profession is entitled to exercise.Bar Human Rights Committee of England and Wales @BarHumanRights expresses concern at the Supreme Court's contempt verdict against Prashant Bhushan @pbhushan1."An independent and impartial judiciary is stronger when enabling open and public debate on its operations", it says. pic.twitter.com/NeYbfS1x16— Live Law (@LiveLawIndia) August 18, 2020The Bar Human Rights Committee was founded in 1991, by the former Chairman of the Bar Council of England and Wales, Anthony Scrivener QC and its stated mission is "to protect and promote international human rights through the rule of law, by using the international human rights law expertise of the UK's most experienced and talented human rights barristers". Meanwhile, several lawyers in India expressed their dismay at the Supreme Court verdict, and issued public statements and held demonstrations expressing solidarity with Bhushan.Over 2000 lawyers, including noted Senior Advocates, have endorsed the statement of support for Bhushan.Bodies like Bar Association of India, Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative (CHRI), Campaign for Judicial Accountability and Reforms (CJAR) have also criticized the verdict against Bhushan.Over a 100 advocates of the Madras High Court, including Senior Counsels, participated in a peaceful protest against the judgement rendered by a 3-judge Bench headed by Justice Arun Mishra holding Adv. Prashant Bhushan in contempt over two tweets. @pbhushan1 #ContemptofCourt pic.twitter.com/ygKKVJfQr3— Live Law (@LiveLawIndia) August 18, 2020On August 14, the Supreme Court held Bhushan guilty of criminal contempt for tweeting against the judiciary. One tweet, made in reference to a picture of CJI Bobde seated on a Harley Davidson bike, alleged that the CJI was enjoying expensive bike rides while keeping the Supreme Court under lockdown.Another tweet alleged that the Supreme Court contributed to the destruction of democracy in the last six years, and the last 4 CJIs played a particular role in that.The Court held that the tweets were based on "distorted facts" and had the effect of undermining the authority and dignity of the court."The tweet has the effect of destabilising the very foundation of this important pillar of the Indian democracy...There is no manner of doubt, that the tweet tends to shake the public confidence in the institution of judiciary", observed a bench of Justices Arun Mishra, B R Gavai and Krishna Murari in the judgment.Read Full Statement of Bar Human Rights Committee of England and Wales :"On Friday 14th August senior human rights lawyer Prashant Bhushan was convicted of criminal contempt of court by the Supreme Court of India. In publishing two tweets relating to the Chief Justice of India and the role of the Supreme Court in the last six years, on his Twitter feed, he was found to have committed "contempt which scandalises or lowers the authority of the Supreme Court", pursuant to...

Prashant Bhushan Contempt: UK Lawyers Body Expresses Concern; Says 'Lawyers Entitled To Voice Legitimate Criticism'

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

"An independent and impartial judiciary is stronger when enabling open and public debate on its operations"

Tags