ABSTRACT
This chapter examines the Appellate Division's rationale for retaining the contempt of scandalisation and considers its impact on the rule of law in Bangladesh. The Appellate Division has held that the retention of the contempt of scandalisation was essential for the rule of law, applying a procedural definition of the rule of law, although recent judicial trends incorporate more qualitative features. The chapter discusses the background against which the leading judgments dealing with the offence of scandalisation were decided. It explains the contempt of scandalisation and its origins. It discusses the grounds on which the Appellate Division justified this form of contempt. The chapter considers how the Appellate Division dealt with the judgments of other common law jurisdictions in concluding that the contempt of scandalisation is a reasonable restriction on the freedom of press. The freedom of press under section 2(b) the Canadian Charter of the Rights and Freedoms is subject to reasonable restrictions, as in Bangladesh Constitution.
