The contempt compromise

WE feel no hesitation in saying that the action of the Legislative Assembly in referring the Contempt of Court Bill to a Select Committee will meet with strong and energetic disapproval in the country. That the action was the result of a compromise between the leader of the Swarajists and the Government is perfectly obvious — on no other basis could such an overwhelming majority in favour of the motion for referring the Bill to a Select Committee as that of 74 in a House consisting of only 90 members be explained. It is equally obvious that by this compromise, the people have gained something. The elimination of the definition of contempt undoubtedly removes from the Bill one of its most obnoxious features — a feature against which a large part of the criticism evoked by the Bill was directed. If in spite of this fact we cannot but regard the compromise as extremely unfortunate, it is because the present is not one of those cases in which there is any room for a compromise, because the whole Bill is an utterly unnecessary, extremely undesirable and thoroughly obnoxious encroachment upon the liberty of the Press and the rights of public criticism of the judiciary which in the present conditions is too often prevented from going seriously wrong only by the knowledge that the eyes of a vigilant Press are upon it. It is impossible to alter this character of the Bill without making it useless from the point of view of its authors. The idea of those popular members who went into the lobby with the Government in this matter clearly was that the definition of contempt was the most objectionable thing in the Bill and that once this feature was eliminated, it would be easy to modify the Bill in the Select Committee as to make it more or less innocuous from the people’s point of view.