Latest update February 16th, 2025 7:47 AM
Oct 26, 2021 Letters
Dear Editor,
So many lawsuits are filed against the media. KN is targeted. Is the intention of the lawsuits to shut down the media and/or to stop them from exposing wrongdoings, or to grovel and cower in fear? I support absolute freedom of the press, but not freedom to attack people with malice and hate.
I don’t claim or pretend to know the law on media defamation lawsuits in Guyana. But I read and studied freedom of press lawsuits in the U.S. Most of the lawsuits filed in Guyana and awarded damages would be considered as frivolous and thrown out of court. In fact, the filers (plaintiffs) who claim defamation would find themselves paying court costs. Proving defamation in the US is very difficult.
The media in the US and in developed democratic countries, as well as in India, allow wide latitude of freedom of the press. In particular, hardly any restrictions are placed on the media by the court when commenting or reporting or allowing views on or about politicians. Plaintiffs tend to lose most of their cases against the press for defamation. If won at lower courts, judgments are often overturned on appeal. The Supreme Court leans towards protecting free speech by the media especially against public officials and has overturned several lower court rulings. The court often stated that free speech helps to hold public officials accountable and to govern in the public interest. The public interest overrides all other interests even when an individual’s feelings or reputation is hurt or damaged.
In the US, defamation is very hard to prove, gives the public near absolute freedom of the press. Those claiming defamation (libel) must prove malice and intent to defame and that the defendant knows ahead of publication that the information to be published is/was false. The latter element or condition is hard to prove. There is no way the media would know that the views expressed in a letter or op ed commentary are false. And why shouldn’t the public have a right to critique or comment on their government’s or representative’s policy? How else would government or politicians know about the public’s view of them? In a claim of defamation, one must also prove intent to ‘ridicule’ and loss of income. How can a claimant claim he or she suffered a loss of income if a person is unemployable or suffer no financial losses?
A lawsuit must prove serious harm — that the person commented on would suffer serious ridicule and loss of income. This in itself can bar a libel defamation suit. How would one prove loss of income if one were a senior government official of a country, for example, receiving a sizeable pension? If one would not be employed, how would one lose income from public ridicule?
The courts in Guyana should grant the press wide latitude to publish views, editorials, satires, sarcasms, ridiculing policies and politicians. The media should be allowed to criticise public officials all towards the objective of holding the latter accountable.
Yours truly,
Vishnu Bisram
Feb 15, 2025
Kaieteur Sports – The Guyana Boxing Association (GBA) has officially selected an 18-member squad, alongside four coaches, to represent the nation at the highly anticipated 2025 Caribbean Boxing...Peeping Tom… Kaieteur News- You know, I never thought I’d see the day when elections in Guyana would become something... more
Antiguan Barbudan Ambassador to the United States, Sir Ronald Sanders By Sir Ronald Sanders Kaieteur News- The upcoming election... more
Freedom of speech is our core value at Kaieteur News. If the letter/e-mail you sent was not published, and you believe that its contents were not libellous, let us know, please contact us by phone or email.
Feel free to send us your comments and/or criticisms.
Contact: 624-6456; 225-8452; 225-8458; 225-8463; 225-8465; 225-8473 or 225-8491.
Or by Email: [email protected] / [email protected]