Latest update November 22nd, 2024 1:00 AM
Latest News
- Exxon wants new oil block on own terms
- Indian companies eye Guyana’s oil
- ICC issues arrest warrant for Israeli PM Netanyahu for ‘war crimes’ in Gaza
- Developing countries should not be curtailed in exploiting natural resources- PM Modi tells Parliament
- Govt- owned Marriott sells VP Jagdeo expired soft drink
Jagdeo/Kissoon libel case to re-convene today
…nine months and no word on plaintiff’s appeal
The High Court libel case involving former President Bharrat Jagdeo, and Kaieteur News columnist Fredrick Kissoon,
Former President Bharrat Jagdeo
the newspaper’s publisher Glenn Lall and its Editor-in-Chief Adam Harris, will re-commence today before Justice Brassington Reynolds.
The case had been suspended in light of an appeal against the amendment of the case for the defence. However, nine months later the defendants are yet to receive any documentation relating to the appeal.
Justice Reynolds had expressed the hope of having the libel case, which has been dragging on for four years now, completed in a timely manner. He suspended the case to afford the plaintiff time to appeal the decision he made relating to the defence case.
At the last hearing on March 26, last, lead attorney for the former President, Senior Counsel Bernard De Santos, had difficulty with evidence that a defence witness was presenting a few weeks earlier. Trade unionist, Lincoln Lewis, had stated in his testimony that the former President had intentionally suppressed the Critchlow Labour College.
His evidence came in line with allegations made by Kissoon in a column, that Jagdeo had made certain decisions while in office to depress certain agencies that benefited mostly Afro-Guyanese. The evidence was one of several other testimonies against the former President.
De Santos (SC) had expressed however, his discontent with the evidence and had charged that while the defence was making assertions and bringing evidence to speak of ills against the former President, none was bringing evidence to justify their statements. He was adamant that the defence must not only provide what it says is evidence, but they must also justify the evidence.
He said that they should not only bring witnesses to say what the President had done, but prove the accusations; for example, that while Jagdeo was at the helm of the country, Afro-Guyanese were being sidelined for certain jobs.
Nigel Hughes is representing the Kaieteur News team. He had responded to De Santos’ objections by stating that the
Kaieteur News columnist Fredrick Kissoon
defence was tasked with proving statements made against the former President. This, he related, was based on various researches which Kissoon (the defendant) had conducted.
He had stated, also, that the defence’s case is a plea of justifying the statements Kissoon made against the former President, and in doing so, witnesses were being called to speak on the areas of public/social services where “ideological racism” was practised.
In De Santos’ call for the justification of the evidence, Hughes said that the defence would be seeking to amend the case to deal specifically with the issue of justification. He had indicated also, that what De Santos was asking in terms of justification of evidence would require the defence to amend its case to include the justification of the evidence the witnesses were bringing out.
De Santos was however, unsupportive of the defence being allowed to amend their case. He was specifically concerned that not only would the defence be amending their case after the plaintiff would have closed theirs, but it would also be prejudicial to the plaintiff’s side.
De Santos decided therefore that he would appeal the matter.
More than three years into the libel case, De Santos was against Hughes seeking to make amendments at this stage of the matter. He had argued that the defence should have known that they would have to amend their case and thus make the necessary changes.
When Kaieteur News sought clarity from Hughes on the reply to the appeal yesterday, he told the paper that the defence is yet to receive a reply from the plaintiff. He confirmed that no documentation was handed over to the defence in relation to the appeal.
It is unclear however, what steps would be taken if the appeal was not made at all, since the appeal would have been the sole cause of the matter being suspended.
Jagdeo is suing the defendants for more than $10M.
Similar Articles
THE BLUNT OF THE DAY
Sports
Features/Columnists
A false panacea for electoral integrity
…Peeping Tom kaieteur News – Advocates for fingerprint verification in Guyana’s elections herald it as... more
Rising Gun Crimes in the Caribbean: Urgent Action required by all
By Sir Ronald Sanders Kaieteur News – There is an alarming surge in gun-related violence, particularly among younger... more
Weekend Cartoon
