What does Kangaroo Court mean?

When the accepted standards of law or justice are ignored, that court is called a ‘kangaroo court’. This is an informal derogatory term for a court. A court that gives arbitrary judgments without any regard for established laws and regulations is called a kangaroo court in mockery.

Kangaroo, the national animal of Australia, carries its baby in its pouch. The kangaroo court is also considered to be in someone else’s pocket. Judges are also puppets of others. That is, the court of such a judge is incapable of giving an independent and impartial judgment or does not deliver the just order intentionally. What verdict will be announced in favor of the plaintiff or the defendant is predetermined in advance in this case.

The idea of kangaroo court originated in the United States in the first half of the nineteenth century. In 1849, the term was associated with the ownership of gold mines in California. At that time, a summary judgment system was in place for the permanent owner of the gold mine. The short judicial system of that time was also accustomed to pronouncing judgments without regard to the prevailing rules and regulations as like the kangaroo hops.

When riots or unrest broke out in the border areas of California over the rights to gold mines, irregular courts were set up. The courts were mobile for local needs. The judges of the court operated these mobile courts. However, their salaries depended on the number of cases resolved. In some cases, the judges were paid from the fines that were collected by giving sentences. As a result, the tendency to pronounce judgments without following the prevailing rules and regulations increased in this system. Any defendant deprived of justice in a verdict began to use the term kangaroo court in a derogatory tone about such courts, which is still common today.

In the first half of 1800, writer Samuel Adams Hammett published a magazine using pseudonym. One of his writings states, ‘Judge ‘G’ was unanimously elected and as a result the regular judicial work of Mustang or Kangaroo Court began’. It is claimed that although the similarity of the word with the hopping of a kangaroo is apparently acceptable, the subject of Mustang Court is common in the United States. Kangaroo Court is also used in the same sense. Mustang is an American wild horse. Small in size.

The Supreme Court of the United States also used the term Kangaroo Court in 1967 regarding the trial of a juvenile offender. In this judgment, it was said that there must be constitutional rules and regulations in the trial of juveniles. In any case, the trial court or the prosecutor conducting the hearing in English, which is called Due process of law. Such a principle was declared in the judgment. Because, the Supreme Court of the United States felt that the established rules had been violated in the trial of juvenile offenders, the judgment clearly states that juvenile offenders are also entitled to be tried according to the established rules. There is no room for trial through kangaroo courts in violation of this rule.

In 1951, an associate judge gave a further explanation of such trials in a judgment. In this context, he mentioned the issue of the police torturing the arrested accused to make him confess. In this case too, the associate judge used the term kangaroo court. In his words, the trial is biased through police torture and kangaroo courts were born.

In Bangladesh too, many examples of irregular courts have been published in the media from time to time. In some cases, the High Court took appropriate action after learning about these incidents, but such strange and medieval judicial systems have not stopped. One of them is the fatwa and village arbitration system. However, the High Court ruled to ban this system many years ago regarding fatwa. Despite this, the announcement of fatwas has not stopped completely. Because such 'judges' are not punished appropriately.

The term kangaroo court was also used by a political figure under trial in 2008 about some special courts supported by the military. He called these courts as kangaroo courts. There were some errors and deviations in the verdicts of those courts. As a result, almost all the accused filed cases against the High Court verdict.

Occasionally, strange and inhuman trials are being published in cases of rape of women. In these trials, the trial seekers have been caned or fined. In such kangaroo court trials, only the women who are the trial seekers are affected, which is absolutely unacceptable. At the village level, the Union Parishad has limited powers of trial, and it also has rules and regulations. There are allegations that many public representatives run kangaroo courts. In Gaibandha, the news of such a trial was published in the media. There were also allegations of running such a court regarding a member of parliament, which was later closed as the media was vocal about the matter.

From these examples, it can be understood that if the appointment of judges is biased, there is a risk of the emergence of kangaroo courts. Kangaroo courts also seek awareness and a neutral perspective from the authorities in the appointment of judges.