The magistracy is under attack

Mar 26, 2026 Features / Columnists, Peeping Tom

---

(Kaieteur News) – Social media was once praised as a tool for connection and free expression. It allowed ordinary people to share ideas, tell stories, and participate in public debate. Today, however, it has taken a troubling turn. It has become an open platform where almost anyone can publish fiction as fact. Too often, information is shared without verification. Claims are made without evidence. Rumours are dressed up as truth and spread at alarming speed.

This problem is not just about misinformation. It is also about harm. Social media is now being used as a weapon. It is used to attack individuals. It is used to damage reputations. It is used to spread lies about people who may have little means to defend themselves. Even worse, it is sometimes used to extort money. Individuals are threatened with further false allegations unless they comply with demands. This is a dangerous abuse of a powerful tool.

Over the past few months, we have seen a troubling development in Guyana. A member of the judicial system has been unfairly targeted. She has been accused of many things. These accusations have been made without proof. They have been repeated across social media pages. The tone has often been harsh and malicious. There has been little regard for truth or fairness.

What is even more concerning is the apparent silence from those in authority. Certain pro-government social media pages and their supporters have taken part in these attacks. Yet no clear voice from the government has called for an end to this behaviour. No strong condemnation has been issued. This silence can be seen as acceptance. It can encourage others to continue such actions.

This situation should worry every citizen. If a member of the magistracy can be treated in this way, then no one is safe. Magistrates are officers of the court. They operate within a system that provides some level of protection. Yet even with these protections, they are being publicly attacked. Imagine then what can happen to ordinary citizens who lack such safeguards. Their reputations can be destroyed overnight.

It is important to understand that criticism is not the problem. In a democratic society, people have the right to question decisions. They have the right to disagree with rulings. They have the right to express concerns about the administration of justice. This kind of criticism can even strengthen the system. It encourages transparency and accountability.

However, there is a clear line that must not be crossed. Criticizing a decision of the court is not the same as attacking the character of a magistrate.  One focuses on the outcome of a case. The other targets the individual. When criticism becomes personal, it shifts from debate to defamation. When false claims are made about a magistrate, it undermines public confidence in the court.

This is where the concept of contempt becomes important. Contempt of court includes actions that bring the court into disrepute. It includes behaviour that undermines the authority of the judicial system. When individuals make false and damaging statements about magistrates, they are not simply expressing an opinion. They are attacking the integrity of the court itself. This can interfere with the proper administration of justice.

The magistracy has the power to act in such cases. It can summon individuals who engage in such conduct. It can hold them accountable for contempt. This is not about silencing criticism. It is about protecting the dignity and authority of the court. It is about ensuring that justice is not weakened by reckless and harmful speech.

So far, the magistracy has shown restraint. It has been lenient in not taking action against those responsible. This restraint may have been intended to avoid escalating tensions. However, the situation has now reached a critical point. The continued attacks suggest that leniency is being taken as weakness. There may now be a need for firm action.

It is also important to note that contempt proceedings carry serious consequences. They are not matters to be taken lightly. Once a finding of contempt is made, the options for appeal are limited. This reflects the seriousness of the offence. It shows how important it is to protect the integrity of the judicial system.

The time has come to draw a clear line. The attacks on members of the magistracy must stop. Social media must not be allowed to become a space where lies thrive and reputations are destroyed. Freedom of expression is a fundamental right. But it is not an unlimited right. It does not give anyone the freedom to defame others. It does not allow the spreading of falsehoods without consequence.

Every citizen has a role to play. We must think before we share. We must question what we read. We must refuse to participate in the spread of harmful content. At the same time, those in authority must speak out. Silence is no longer acceptable.

The integrity of our judicial system depends on respect. It depends on truth. It depends on fairness. These values must be protected. The current trend on social media threatens all three. It is time to act.

(The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of this newspaper.)

---

• magistracy, Peeping Tom, social media, under attack

---