UK Contempt Law: To Be or Not To Be Changed?
The Law Commissions’ have suggested expanding on what the police may publish about a suspect at the moment of an arrest, but what does this mean for UK contempt law in England and Wales?
The recommendation to shift ‘active’ status from arrest to charge clarifies when the strict liability rule begins to apply. In The Contempt of Court Act 1981, the strict liability rule catches anyone whose published material could pose a ‘substantial risk’ of serious prejudice to an active case. If you’re found to be contempt of court, you could serve up to a 2-year prison sentence or get a fine and in the worst-case scenario, both.
Before being charged, factual information such as age, gender or nationality, usually presents low risk to outing someone’s identity because a jury has yet to be formed and proceedings have not yet open. After a suspect is charged, any publication that poses a significant risk of unfairly influencing the upcoming trial may amount to contempt of court. This system exists to safeguard the reliability of evidence and ensure the jury remains impartial.
Contempt of court occurs when someone risks unfairly influencing a court case. It may stop someone from getting a fair trial and can affect a trial’s outcome and includes:
- Disobeying or ignoring a court order;
- Taking photos or shouting aloud in court;
- Refusing to answer the courts questions if called as a witness;
- Publicly commenting on a court case, this can be via social media, online news publications, broadcast tv etc.
When publicly commenting on a court case, you could be in contempt of court if you publicly say whether you think the person is guilty or not, refer to someone’s previous convictions, name someone the judge has allowed to be anonymous (even if you weren’t aware) name victims, witnesses or offenders under 18, name sex crime victims, or share any evidence or facts about a case that the judge has said cannot be made public.
It is important to mention that nationality, gender and age are usually low risk details, so carry a small percentage of revealing someone’s identity. However these low-risk details do depend on the circumstances of a specific case, so it’s always best to check.
Whether the Law Commission suggestions to expand what the police can report about a suspect upon arrest become implemented in the law remains to be seen, but they signal a push to greater clarity in reporting rules and poses an ongoing debate about how to inform the public without compromising justice.