Among the more rewarding aspects of foreign travel is the time and opportunity one gets to peruse newspapers of different countries.
Among the more rewarding aspects of foreign travel is the time and opportunity one gets to peruse newspapers of different countries.
Having read and heard many a choice insult in my time, my attention was grabbed by the headline "Worst Insult Possible" on the front page of The Straits Times when I transited through Singapore yesterday.
The news item quoted Singapore High Court Justice Judith Prakash as saying that the conduct of three men who wore T-shirts depicting a kangaroo dressed in judges' robes at a High Court hearing last November, implying that the court system in Singapore was a "kangaroo court", was the worst form of insult to the judiciary.
|
|
frustrated: Speaker Somnath Chatterjee rebuked some MPs last week, but later expressed regret over his statements |
Sentencing the two men and a woman, who are office-bearers of the Singapore Democratic Party, to jail terms ranging from one to two weeks, for contempt of court, Justice Prakash wrote in her judgement that their conduct showed a wilful and stubborn contempt for the integrity of the courts.
She said the offending act was designed to degrade the administration of justice in the country.
"The imputation that the Singapore courts are 'kangaroo courts' is a serious and scurrilous insult that struck at the foundation, the body and the spirit of the justice system in Singapore," she said.
"The message was that justice cannot be obtained in our courts and that the legal proceedings are a sham.
"It is imperative that a clear message be sent to potential contemners that such attacks on the judiciary are not acceptable," a stricture that would be equally relevant to our own Parliament and some of its members, who were dealt a sharp rap on the knuckles by Lok Sabha Speaker Somnath Chatterjee last week.
In the opinion of KHALIDOSCOPE, Mr Chatterjee's subsequent expression of regret to the parliamentarians, who continued to indecorously disrupt proceedings despite his repeated appeals for order and dignity, was unnecessary.
Made in the heat of the moment, his admonishment, born out of despair and frustration, was perfectly in order and, by no means, unparliamentary.
It's time all such disrespect to authority, and unbecoming and wasteful acts of indiscipline were dealt with in our country with the same firm hand in this tiny, but prosperous island-nation.
