The last couple of years have seen a noticeable spike in the number of proceedings for the contempt of scandalization. In January 2015, the editor and joint editor of the most widely distributed national daily, Prothom Alo had to apologize to the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of Bangladesh for an article published on the Chief Justice's appointment process. In the same month the International Crimes Tribunal of Bangladesh called upon fifty people to explain a public statement issued in support of the British journalist David Bergman who had been found guilty of contempt for questioning the liberation war death toll. Later in August 2015, the editor and a reporter of the pro- government Janakantha were not only fined for committing contempt but were also compelled to serve short custodial sentences.* Further in March 2016 two cabinet ministers were found guilty of contempt of court for expressing "their doubts as to the independence and impartiality of the Chief Justice". The majority in this case went further by finding that the contemnors had also violated their oaths as ministers, severely denting their public standing. Starting with the Mahmudur Rahman cases in 2010 right up to the recent case of the two cabinet ministers, the country's highest court, the Appellate Division has affirmed that scandalization very much forms part of the law of contempt in Bangladesh. However, the reasons provided have been less