Joseph P's call for the authorities to "investigate and take appropriate action against ... the Bar Council" for calling for an EGM to discuss the recent appointment and promotion of judges is misguided.

In the first instance, he should not have cited out of context a passage from the judgment of Wilmot J in R v Almon [1765] Wilm 243k as a basis of contempt. It was an archaic decision wholly irrelevant to present circumstances and times.

The years 1760 to 1770 in England are described as the 'Decade of Ministerial Instability'. These were the first 10 years of George III's reign during which time the prime ministership changed seven times.

The rapid changes in government created indecision, blunders and weaknesses in policy for the colonies especially towards America, which eventually led to the War of Independence.

In these years, the public began to vehemently criticise the government for incompetence. The king was criticised for interfering unconstitutionally in politics and for his friends and secret cabinet to influence the cabinet.

It was in this political milieu that Wilmot J made his judgment. It was to suppress public criticism and dissent against the privileged class and the monarchy.

In today's world, contempt of court would extend to assault and insult of judges, interruption and obstruction of court proceedings, non-attendance in court, misbehaviour as witnesses or officers of court, disrespect of the court during proceedings and anything that will subvert the administration of justice and bring the court to disrepute.

In contrast, the Bar Council's grouse against controversial judicial promotions was aimed not at bringing disrepute to judiciary, but at the preservation of its integrity and image in eyes of the public.

The motive of members of the Bar initiating an EGM is not to trivialise the chief justice's power to promote judges, but for the public and democratic cause of protecting and preserving the image and integrity of the judiciary as a public institution in the public eye.

If the authorities heed Joseph's call, we will all know that the state of Malaysia is like that which prevailed in England in the 1770s.

Joseph's call is basically reactionary and an antithesis to the duty of Bar Council to speak up fearlessly for the integrity of administration of justice, independence of judiciary and preservation of democratic institutions.