Contempt

Contempt as a legal word has existed for thousands of years, traceable to the Mosaic Law. Judiciary and contempt exist side by side because contempt is a useful tool in the smooth functioning of the judiciary. However, contempt is not used in courts only. It could be applied elsewhere. But what is contempt? “Contempt may […]

Contempt

Contempt as a legal word has existed for thousands of years, traceable to the Mosaic Law. Judiciary and contempt exist side by side because contempt is a useful tool in the smooth functioning of the judiciary. However, contempt is not used in courts only. It could be applied elsewhere. But what is contempt?

“Contempt may be defined as disobedience or disrespect to a lawful authority of House of Parliament or Court” (Shorter Oxford English Dictionary 3rd ed 380).

Contempt of court is anything done or published, written or calculated to bring a court or judge into contempt; to lower his dignity. See Agbachom vs RTAC 1992 5 NWLR (Pt 241) 366 where it was held: Contempt of court is anything done, or writing published calculated to bring a court or judge of court into contempt or to lower his dignity.

Contempt is also anything calculated to obstruct or interfere with due administration of justice (Agbachom vs RTAC supra). A contemnor is a person who commits contempt [Chief Odu vs Chief Jolaosa 2005 All FWLR (Pt 262) 428]. Before an act or omission is deemed contempt, it must be done with intention or intentionally [Basil Okoma vs Sunday Udoh 2002 1 NWLR (Pt 748) 438.]

Anything which scandalises or is calculated to bring a court into disrepute is contempt. See Mobil Oil vs S. T. Assan 1995 8 NWLR (Pt 412) 129. The question of motive is irrelevant in contempt cases [R vs Poplar Borough Council (No.2) 1922 1 K.B 95].

The power to punish for contempt is inherent in all courts; courts of first instance or appellate courts [Unipetrol vs Edo State Board of Internal Revenue 2001 10 NWLR (Pt 720) 169]. The power to punish for contempt is not for personal protection of the judge but that of the public [R vs Davidson 1821 4B and Ald 329]. Contempt of court is used from a sense of duty or under pressure of public necessity [Mcleod vs St Aubyn 1899 A.C. 549].

 Functions of contempt

First, contempt preserves dignity and respect of courts. See Chapman vs Honig 1963 2 Q.B 502 at 518 – “Those pages show that for the purpose of deciding whether a contempt of court has been committed in a case of this kind, the determining factor is not harm done to the individual but harm done to the future administration of justice.”

Secondly, contempt ensures fair trial by ensuring dignity of court and reputation as an institution. See  Jennison vs Baker 1972 1 All ELR 997 at 1001 –  “The power exists to ensure that justice shall be done. And solely to this end it prohibits acts and words tending to obstruct the administration of justice.” In Chief Odu vs Chief Jolaoso 2005 All FWLR (Pt 262) 428, it was opined by court that: “By its nature, punishment for contempt is to punish an offender for an act that somehow affects the dignity of the court in the administration of justice.” All courts have innate power to punish for contempt. See Chief Odu vs Chief Jolaoso supra, where it was held: “…it is an inherent power in that it is innate to the court once it is established.”

Thirdly, contempt exists as a useful tool in the administration of justice. In Fame Publications vs Encomium Ventures 2000 8 NWLR (Pt. 667) 105, it was held: “It must be remembered that the principle enshrined in the law of contempt are to uphold and ensure the effective administration of justice.” Any act of disobedience to court order is checked by contempt. See Russsell vs East Anglia Railway 1850 20 Ch. 257 where it was held: “it is an established rule that is not open to a party to question any or process of the court by disobedience and it is not inconsistent with the general rule that the court in administrating punishment for disobedience to an order attendant to all facts of the case…”

Fourth is that contempt checks undue interference in the administration of justice.  It was clearly opined in Hermone vs Smith 1887 15 Ch.D 449 at 455 as follows: “The object of the disciple enforced by the court in case of contempt of court is not to vindicate the dignity of the court or the person of the judge, but to prevent undue interference with the administration of justice.”

Last but not the least – contempt maintains order and decorum in a court, thus any person who misbehaves in a court can be checkmated by court. However, it is not every disobedience to court that will amount to contempt Awosanyo vs Board of Custom L.C.N 117 at 127.

 Types of Contempt

There are various types of contempt. It was thus held in Rt. Hon. Azikiwe vs FEDECO LCN (Law of Contempt in Nigeria by Gani Fawehinmi LCN) 285 at 287 that there are 2 types of contempt:

Contempt could either be in the face of the court (infacie curiae) or outside the court (exfacie curiae).

However, in St. James Evening Post Case 1942 Atk 469, it was held per His Lordship Hardwicke L.J. that there are 3 types of contempt.

There are three different sort of contempt. One kind of contempt is scandalising the court itself. There may be likewise contempt of   this court, in abusing parties who are concerned in the cause, there  may be also a contempt of this court, in prejudicing mankind  against another person before their cause is heard.

Historically, contempt is classified as criminal contempt or civil contempt. The court in Fawehinmi vs A.G.F. 1990 5 NWLR (Pt 148) 42 at 83 held as follows:

Traditionally contempt is classified into either:

  1. a) criminal contempt
  2. b) civil contempt

Whether contempt is infacie curiae, exfacie curiae, criminal contempt or civil contempt, they all share one characteristic; they involve interference in the due administration of justice. A.G. vs Laveller Magazine Ltd 1979 A.C. 440 at 449 held as follows:

They all share common characteristics; they involve interference with due administration of justice either in a particular case or more generally as a continued process.

Justice Usman Bwala is a retired Justice of the High Court of Borno State

BREAKING: Oshiomhole, Shaibu deliver LG for APC

Actress Ini Edo announces engagement, set to remarry

Edo Guber: PDP rejects results as collation crosses 10 LGAs

Okpebholo clinches LG, trumps Ighodalo