Arguments brew as source documents presented in Kissoon libel case
February 5, 2013, By KNews, Filed Under News, Source
As source documents reportedly used in Kaieteur News columnist and former University of Guyana lecturer Fredrick Kissoon’s research were presented to the court yesterday, sparks flew when the defence and lawyer for the plaintiff went head to head over the relevance and authenticity of the information, and whether the information should be accepted into evidence.
Plaintiff: Bharrat Jagdeo
Senior Counsel Bernard De Santos, representing former President Bharrat Jagdeo, made numerous objections about the contents of the documents and their truthfulness. The reports were presented before Justice Brassington Reynolds at the Supreme Court, where Kissoon is currently being led in evidence-in-chief by Attorney at law Nigel Hughes.
Kaieteur News columnist Fredrick Kissoon
Kissoon along with National Media and Publishing Company, Publisher of Kaieteur News, and Editor-in-Chief Adam Harris, is being sued for over $10M.
Jagdeo in 2010, claimed libel, when he charged that in one of Kissoon’s daily columns, the writer called him an “ideological racist”.
At a previous session, Kissoon had said that he noticed a trend that Indo-Guyanese holding top end positions were not being prosecuted by the state when found with job related discrepancies. He had made specific reference to Nirmal Rekha, Secretary to the Treasury, who he said was investigated by the Guyana Revenue Authority (GRA) on fraud allegations, but was never charged.
De Santos had argued that Kissoon had no evidence to make such a statement. Well since Kissoon had stated that he acquired the GRA report on Rekha, he presented it yesterday. It was entitled, “Report into irregularities committed by Nirmal Rekha”, addressed to the Commissioner General of the GRA from the Internal Audit department of that same entity. De Santos, before the document was tendered objected to its contents. He said that the document never found Rekha guilty of any offence.
To the first objection Hughes answered by reading pages 20-21 of the report which found that Rekha and others were involved in fraud pertaining to duty free concessions for re-migrants. The document said, “It is a clear cut case of collusion between officers of the Ministry of Finance (which named Rekha and others) and Ms. Dundas, re-migrant officer at the Ministry of Home Affairs.”
It continued, “Rekha will have to explain the discrepancies to the Commissioner of Police who should be called in to investigate the matter.”
Hughes answered that De Santos’s second objection was a matter for cross examination. He charged that the court would make the final decision on the relevance of the content of the report after the document is admitted into evidence.
Hughes clarified that the report is merely being tendered as a source document since the defendant said that he conducted his research based on its contents.
De Santos however argued that the information brought out did not correspond with Kissoon’s original claim that Rehka had been found guilty of discrepancies. He also questioned the authenticity, certification and accuracy.
The court however intervened and reminded that the original statement by Kissoon was that Indo-Guyanese in managerial positions were not being investigated by the police for work-related irregularities. He said the document is not at the stage where its relevance and accuracy as such are under examination. Justice Brassington thus overruled De Santos and admitted the GRA report.
Another document, “the Mc Dougall report” which was tendered for identification earlier in the case was also presented. The document is a United Nations-sponsored study on racial discrimination and practices in Guyana.
Kissoon said that the document was published and handed over to the government while the plaintiff was still President.
De Santos after reading the report objected and said that the title had nothing to do with racial discrimination and practices as Kissoon said.
Again augments arose with Hughes submitting that the report is only a source document. Relevance to content he urged, is for cross examination and the scrutiny of the court.
Certain parts of the report were also read out in court to show that the report, in fact, related to racial woes reportedly existing in Guyana. The study was done from July 28 to August 1 of 2008 and it highlighted how Afro-Guyanese felt in regards to equal rights and opportunities.
So far Kissoon has presented to the court documentation based on research done on the former President. From his findings, he is at the point of identifying sources and reference documents to support his conclusions.
The matter will be called again on March 4. Kissoon will continue to explain why he called Jagdeo an “Ideological racist.”