Just went through two headline news of Kuensel and both covering the same defamation case. I can understand the mood of perplexity of some of us non legal people. But why legal professionals are questioning, that too anonymously, the appropriateness of withdrawl of cases after they themselves quote the law that permit the same. Perhaps some interested parties feel cheated out of their spectacle of gladiator fights. Court cases are experiences that most would want to do without. Only those with money and power might enjoy the process. I am glad for the three individuals that their case has concluded.
Regarding the hype associated to the withdrawl of the cases, actually in life you are quite free until you make a commitment. Like there is no legal penalty in falling in love until you tie the knot and then later attempt to untie it. You can discuss a deal and work towards a deal and be free of liability if you backed out in the last minute before signing the deal. Likewise, in regards to Court cases until the verdict is out, there are rooms for litigants and even judges to determine the course of the case. Once the verdict is declared then not much can be done even by the judge of that particular Court. That is why there is an appeal Court.
Even in cases where a party withdraws the case filed, I think the other party can appeal to the next higher Court if dissatisfied with the decision of the lower Court. If that is not at all possible then one can initiate a new case against that person/ party. The deemed harassed party should not have to be satisfied with the compensation awarded by a Court.
In case of the two defamation cases in Thimphu Dzongkhag Courts that were ultimately withdrawn by the initiators, both the initiators were not let go free. They were subjected to consequences of their actions. Now if those defendants were still not happy and feel justice has not been served to their satisfaction, they should seek rooms to appeal.
But it is not upto to the spectators to make decisions for such defendants. Spectators can speculate.But why would legal professionals and main stream media hype the issue? Did they discover something behind the sudden development? Was the initiator bribed or threatened to withdraw his case. Were the two defendants cajoled to succumb to the Court verdict?
So far none of the defendants in the two defamation cases have publicly expressed their desire to appeal against the final Dzongkhag Court verdicts. Perhaps the closure of the second defamation case brought relief to all three involved individuals. They did not sound particularly aggrieved by the conclusion. That's more than what can be said about DPT in the first defamation case. For DPT the case is over and yet it is just blowing up. A restrained stance from media and anonymous few legal professionals could prevent another hype.