Can you insult a judge

Civil contempt occurs when the contemnor willfully disobeys a court order. This is also called indirect contempt because it occurs outside the judge's immediate realm, and evidence must be presented to the judge to prove the contempt.

A civil contemnor, too, may be fined, jailed, or both. The fine or jailing is meant to coerce the contemnor into obeying the court, not to punish him, and the contemnor will be released from jail just as soon as he complies with the court order. In family law, civil contempt is one way a court enforces alimony, child support, custody, and visitation orders which have been violated. However, many courts have realized that, at least regarding various procedural matters such as the appointment of counsel, the distinction between civil and criminal contempt is often blurred and uncertain.

By the Constitution of the United States, each house of Congress may determine the rules of its proceeding's, punish its members for disorderly behavior, and with the concurrence of two-thirds, expel a member.

The same provision is substantially contained in the constitutions of the several states. The power to make rules carries that of enforcing them, and to attach persons who violate them and punish them for contempt. This power of punishing for contempt is confined to punishment during the session of the legislature and cannot extend beyond it, and it seems this power cannot be exerted beyond imprisonment.

Courts of justice have an inherent power to punish all persons for contempt of their rules and orders, for disobedience of their process, and for disturbing them in their proceedings.

In some states, as in Pennsylvania, the power to punish for contempt is restricted to offenses committed by the officers of the court, or in its presence, or in disobedience of its mandates, orders, or rules.

However, no one is guilty of contempt for any publication made or act done out of court which is not in violation of such lawful rules or orders or disobedience of its process. The fact that the section is written in this manner grants full power to the court. Whenever a contempt of court is committed before the court, the court may punish that person immediately without having to inquire or to give the defendant an opportunity to defend the case.

This kind of special power is contained only for an offence of contempt of court. For other offences in any law, a person could be found guilty and punished only when following a trial. The process commences when a victim reports the incident to the police who will investigate the facts. The police will then interrogate witnesses or suspects.

Prosecutors will also consider whether to prosecute the case. Once the case reaches the court, the court will make an inquiry and examine witnesses before the defendant. The defendant has rights to deny and defend the case fully; for example, he has rights to have a lawyer, to present evidence to prove his innocence or claim for a penalty mitigation or impunity.

For an offence of insult of court before the court punishes anyone, it has to follow this process. Nevertheless, for an offence of contempt of court, special power has been granted to the court because it is specified in the Civil Procedure Code and it is not an offence in the Criminal Code.

The purpose of this offence is to allow the proceeding and adjudication to run smoothly. Since one of the elements is that an offence is committed before the court and in its sight, the law grants the power to the court to order punishment immediately in order not to waste time.

Nonetheless, in practice, if an offence is not committed before the court, the judge may call witnesses to examine until he can establish the adequate facts to make a decision.

Supreme Court decision no. When it appears to the court that a contempt of court takes place, it does not matter that it was committed before the court or if the court learns about it from other evidence. The court may order to have that person punished immediately. The incident does not need to be reported to the police. The court powers to establish the facts and not having to follow normal process and does not have to conduct the procedure before the defendant as normal criminal cases.

Contempt of court is a special provision; there is no need to inquire whether an accused has a lawyer. The inquiry is not a witness examination; it is solely a fact inquiry; an accused does not need to swear under oath. Below are examples of how the Supreme Court interprets and lays out punishment for insult of court and contempt of court.

In Decision no. Such speech or written statement were considered as destroy reputation of the court and as a consequence the court is insulted and hated. However, it does not mean that a speech or writing criticism of the performance of the court would not constitute an offence of contempt of court.

The Freedom of Expression Documentation Center by iLaw has documented information about the use of the law to restrict freedom of expression. We have found many cases concerning many people who have expressed opinions and vented that they have been repressed under judicial process and who have been punished for an offence of insult of court and contempt of court. Please find below examples of the cases. The case of Sudsa-nguan: protest in front of Civil Court. Sudsa-nguan was accused in that he brought more than one hundred people to gather in front of the Civil Court in order to protest its decision invoking the Emergency Act.

They placed a flower wreath and displayed written statements. The Supreme Court ruled that the case was a contempt of court and ordered one month-imprisonment. The Court was of the opinion that Sudsa-nguan, a law professor, brought the group of people to pressure the Court and this could be considered a sabotage of the institution of the court.

This action could deprive the court of its impartiality as it may be pressured to follow the mood of the parties. This could lead to trouble and the law not being respected. The Court found that the behavior of Sudsa-gnuan is bold and does not show respect for the law. The case of Nattapol: Spraying on the entrance sign of Criminal Court. He was ordered to be imprisoned for one month; however, after he repented; the sentence was suspended for one year.

The case of Kuntat: disseminating statements insulting the court on Facebook. Kuntat was prosecuted by the prosecutor of the Provincial Court of Pranakorn Sri Ayutthaya after he did not come to the court as scheduled. He was accused of having posted a statement on Facebook that the court lacked credibility and justice for the proceeding which was an offence of insult of court and breach of the Computer Act.