HEAD of the Presidential Secretariat (HPS), Dr. Roger Luncheon, yesterday
took the stand again in the High Court before Justice Brassington
Reynolds as the proceedings of President Bharrat Jagdeo’s libel case
against columnist Freddie Kissoon , publisher of the Kaieteur News,
Glenn Lall, and Editor, Adam Harris continued.
Nigel Hughes, head of the team representing the defendants,
questioned Dr Luncheon on the transfer of commercial properties held
by the National Industrial and Commercial Investments Limited (NICIL)
and the locations of health and sport facilities in a bid to establish
that predominantly people of East Indian descent are the
beneficiaries.
The Cabinet Secretary responded that the policy with regard to
disposal of government assets by NICIL is laid out in the approved
Parliamentary Privatisation framework that was instituted long before
President Jagdeo took office.
Hughes sought to list the names of persons and companies to whom
such commercial properties were sold, an approach that was objected to
by the Plaintiff’s attorney, Mohabir Anil Nandlall, who said that
ethnicity cannot be verified merely by people’s names and that
evidence of share capital of companies has to be taken into
consideration as well to determine ownership.
Moreover, Nandlall stated that all the information regarding the
proposition of ownership of said properties is not available, in order
to make clear distinctions with regard to ethnicity, and that the
question was unfair to the witness.
Nandlall, several times, had to object to Hughes’ line of questioning,
which he deemed unfair to the witness.
Dr Luncheon was even asked about granting land to an external company
and again, the plaintiff’s lawyer Nandlall objected to the line of
questioning, on the ground of irrelevance to the case.
Dr Luncheon also said that the sales brought up by Hughes did not
constitute all the sales done by NICIL under President Jagdeo’s
tenure.
Also under cross-examination, Dr Luncheon listed the names of other
Afro Guyanese who purchased property from NICIL, namely the George
family and Stanford Solomon.
The Cabinet Secretary, in relation to the location of certain health
facilities, noted that the East La Penitence health centre was built in
Georgetown, under President Jagdeo’s tenure.
He also said the Olympic-sized swimming pool is located at Liliendaal,Greater Georgetown.
Several documents were put to Dr Luncheon to confirm certain
information which the document allegedly contained. However, Nandlall
objected, explaining that the witness was not competent to explain
their contents and effect.
The judge expressed the view that the documents could even befuddle
him, much less the witness.
As Hughes’ questioning continued, he sought to establish that a former
Afro Guyanese diplomat was not granted a position in the Amazon
Cooperation Treaty Organisation(ACTO), because she did not receive the
support of the Guyana Government.
Luncheon explained that he was not aware that some ACTO members had
proposed the diplomat’s name for the position. He also stated that he
was unaware that the person was not appointed because the Guyana
Government had not given its support.
The matter was adjourned to today at 09:30hrs for continuation
and ruling.
It stemmed from an article authored by Kissoon and
published in the Kaieteur News on June 28, 2010, entitled, ‘King Kong
sent his goons to disrupt the conference’, which refers to the
Guyanese Head of State as an ideological racist.
A libel case was subsequently made out against the columnist as well
as the newspaper’s editor and publisher.
Excerpts from the Guyana Chronicle
Former Member
Former Member
Albert, I couldn't help noticing that your excerpted post from the Chronicle has about the same width as toilet tissue. But then again the Chronicle is toilet tissue.
Former Member
Roger must cuss out Jagdeo every night for forcing him to submit to this humiliation.
Former Member
No attempt to deprive villages in situating Berbice bridge - Luncheon
By ZOISA FRASER | LOCAL | THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 22, 2011
Dr Roger Luncheon yesterday admitted that government had rejected the contents of a feasibility report and eventually sited the Berbice River Bridge at Palmyra — a largely Indian-Guyanese populated village — but he denied that there was any attempt to deprive other areas as a result.
In testimony under cross-examination in the $10 million libel case brought by President Bharrat Jagdeo against Kaieteur News and columnist Freddie Kissoon, Luncheon said that US-based company Figg Engineering Inc conducted one of the first feasibility studies on the location of the bridge, but he could not recall whether it was a pre-feasibility study or feasibility study. “I know it was one or the other,” he said in response to a question posed by defence attorney Nigel Hughes. He added that either five or six such studies were done. According to Luncheon, who is Head of the Presidential Secretariat, Cabinet deliberated on the Figg report but he could not recall whether it had outlined the least costly option for the site of the bridge—upstream from the largely African-Guyanese populated Everton.
Dr Roger Luncheon
Luncheon added that bridge’s present location, at Palmyra, bypasses all villages between New Amster-dam and Everton, but he added that he could not definitively say that African Guyanese populated those areas. When asked by Hughes if he agreed that the operation of the bridge and the attendant ending of the ferry service affected the economic well-being of New Amsterdam, he, however, said: “I am not aware of the ferry service ceasing. I am aware that there was a relationship between the service and the economic activity of the township of New Amsterdam.”
Although Luncheon said the feasibility studies did consider the economic impact on the site for the bridge, he did not accept the suggestion by Hughes that Cabinet specifically considered the economic aspect of not placing the bridge anywhere south of Everton. “A final decision was made contrary to the recommendations of the Figg group,” he noted, when asked if the decision to put the bridge at Palmyra was in opposition to the Figg report. He said the decision on the final site for the bridge was based on several considerations, but he was uncertain which engineer’s report influenced Cabinet’s decision on the final location. He added that it was not only based on the engineer’s report and said that it probably came from “our own engineering work service group,” headed by Prime Minister Samuel Hinds.
‘King Kong’ revisited
Luncheon also faced more questions about Guyanese political folklore and the attributes associated with the term ‘King Kong.’ The libel suit was prompted by a June 28, 2010 Kissoon article, titled ‘King Kong sent his goons to disrupt the conference’ and the defence is seeking to justify its portrayal of Jagdeo as an ideological racist who heads a government that practices racism. Kaieteur News columnist Kissoon, Kaieteur News Editor Adam Harris and the National Media and Publishing Company Ltd, the newspaper’s publisher, are the defendants in the suit. According to Luncheon, he would not associate the term with an unpleasant looking person, a caveman or someone with goons, but rather with someone who is violent. He said he did not view ‘King Kong’ as particularly someone who ruled his domain; a king-of-the-jungle type of figure.
Anil Nandlall, the lead lawyer for Jagdeo’s legal team, minutes later objected, saying that he did not think that the witness had expansive knowledge of folklore and asked that the questioning be confined to political folk lore. Justice Brassington Reynolds, who is presiding over the case, however, overruled his objection and permitted Luncheon to respond to the questions arising. Luncheon told the court that he was not aware of the structured form of political folklore and was not aware that ‘King Kong’ had any adversaries in the Guyanese folklore but knew that there were victims, and among them were the PPP, WPA, UF and members of the civil society, including the bar association and religious bodies. He said he could not identify an individual who grabbed the attention of ‘King Kong.’ Asked to describe the ‘King Kong-type’ of attention, he listed “aggression, public diatribes and threats.”
Turning his line of questioning to the article that sparked the libel suit, Hughes referenced two specific paragraphs and asked Luncheon if ‘King Kong’ referred to anyone by name. He responded in the negative. He said it was his understanding that the author of the article was making comparisons between characters and racism, paying special attention to the presidencies of Forbes Burnham, Desmond Hoyte, Cheddi Jagan, Janet Jagan and Bharrat Jagdeo. Among the author’s findings, he said, was the fact those with the exception of Hoyte played down to their respective ethnic constituencies. Luncheon also concluded that the author also found that the difference between the Jagdeo presidency and the others is that he exercised power driven by ideological racism. He acknowledged that the author of the article was an academic who lectures at the University of Guyana and noted that academics are allowed the freedom of research and to come to their own conclusions.
Additionally, Luncheon said he did not have information at his hand reach that the heads of the executive, the legislature and the judiciary were all of Indian descent, but noted that at the time of the publication Jagdeo, Speaker of the National Assembly Ralph Ramkarran and Head of the Judiciary Carl Singh were all Indo-Guyanese. Luncheon, who is the first of Jagdeo’s witnesses and has been on the stand for several weeks, will continue to face cross-examination today.
Source
By ZOISA FRASER | LOCAL | THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 22, 2011
Dr Roger Luncheon yesterday admitted that government had rejected the contents of a feasibility report and eventually sited the Berbice River Bridge at Palmyra — a largely Indian-Guyanese populated village — but he denied that there was any attempt to deprive other areas as a result.
In testimony under cross-examination in the $10 million libel case brought by President Bharrat Jagdeo against Kaieteur News and columnist Freddie Kissoon, Luncheon said that US-based company Figg Engineering Inc conducted one of the first feasibility studies on the location of the bridge, but he could not recall whether it was a pre-feasibility study or feasibility study. “I know it was one or the other,” he said in response to a question posed by defence attorney Nigel Hughes. He added that either five or six such studies were done. According to Luncheon, who is Head of the Presidential Secretariat, Cabinet deliberated on the Figg report but he could not recall whether it had outlined the least costly option for the site of the bridge—upstream from the largely African-Guyanese populated Everton.
Dr Roger Luncheon
Luncheon added that bridge’s present location, at Palmyra, bypasses all villages between New Amster-dam and Everton, but he added that he could not definitively say that African Guyanese populated those areas. When asked by Hughes if he agreed that the operation of the bridge and the attendant ending of the ferry service affected the economic well-being of New Amsterdam, he, however, said: “I am not aware of the ferry service ceasing. I am aware that there was a relationship between the service and the economic activity of the township of New Amsterdam.”
Although Luncheon said the feasibility studies did consider the economic impact on the site for the bridge, he did not accept the suggestion by Hughes that Cabinet specifically considered the economic aspect of not placing the bridge anywhere south of Everton. “A final decision was made contrary to the recommendations of the Figg group,” he noted, when asked if the decision to put the bridge at Palmyra was in opposition to the Figg report. He said the decision on the final site for the bridge was based on several considerations, but he was uncertain which engineer’s report influenced Cabinet’s decision on the final location. He added that it was not only based on the engineer’s report and said that it probably came from “our own engineering work service group,” headed by Prime Minister Samuel Hinds.
‘King Kong’ revisited
Luncheon also faced more questions about Guyanese political folklore and the attributes associated with the term ‘King Kong.’ The libel suit was prompted by a June 28, 2010 Kissoon article, titled ‘King Kong sent his goons to disrupt the conference’ and the defence is seeking to justify its portrayal of Jagdeo as an ideological racist who heads a government that practices racism. Kaieteur News columnist Kissoon, Kaieteur News Editor Adam Harris and the National Media and Publishing Company Ltd, the newspaper’s publisher, are the defendants in the suit. According to Luncheon, he would not associate the term with an unpleasant looking person, a caveman or someone with goons, but rather with someone who is violent. He said he did not view ‘King Kong’ as particularly someone who ruled his domain; a king-of-the-jungle type of figure.
Anil Nandlall, the lead lawyer for Jagdeo’s legal team, minutes later objected, saying that he did not think that the witness had expansive knowledge of folklore and asked that the questioning be confined to political folk lore. Justice Brassington Reynolds, who is presiding over the case, however, overruled his objection and permitted Luncheon to respond to the questions arising. Luncheon told the court that he was not aware of the structured form of political folklore and was not aware that ‘King Kong’ had any adversaries in the Guyanese folklore but knew that there were victims, and among them were the PPP, WPA, UF and members of the civil society, including the bar association and religious bodies. He said he could not identify an individual who grabbed the attention of ‘King Kong.’ Asked to describe the ‘King Kong-type’ of attention, he listed “aggression, public diatribes and threats.”
Turning his line of questioning to the article that sparked the libel suit, Hughes referenced two specific paragraphs and asked Luncheon if ‘King Kong’ referred to anyone by name. He responded in the negative. He said it was his understanding that the author of the article was making comparisons between characters and racism, paying special attention to the presidencies of Forbes Burnham, Desmond Hoyte, Cheddi Jagan, Janet Jagan and Bharrat Jagdeo. Among the author’s findings, he said, was the fact those with the exception of Hoyte played down to their respective ethnic constituencies. Luncheon also concluded that the author also found that the difference between the Jagdeo presidency and the others is that he exercised power driven by ideological racism. He acknowledged that the author of the article was an academic who lectures at the University of Guyana and noted that academics are allowed the freedom of research and to come to their own conclusions.
Additionally, Luncheon said he did not have information at his hand reach that the heads of the executive, the legislature and the judiciary were all of Indian descent, but noted that at the time of the publication Jagdeo, Speaker of the National Assembly Ralph Ramkarran and Head of the Judiciary Carl Singh were all Indo-Guyanese. Luncheon, who is the first of Jagdeo’s witnesses and has been on the stand for several weeks, will continue to face cross-examination today.
Source
Former Member
Freddie vs Jagdeo libel case…Dr Luncheon can’t equate ‘King Kong’ with Jagdeo
SEPTEMBER 22, 2011 | BY KNEWS | FILED UNDER NEWS
President Bharrat Jagdeo is an “ordinary” person and does not come with the coat of immunity the law confers on him in the libel case brought by the President against Kaieteur News columnist Freddie Kissoon, and the newspaper’s editor-in-chief and publishers. This was the argument by attorney Nigel Hughes when the case continued yesterday before Justice Brassington Reynolds. Dr Roger Luncheon, whom the President’s attorney told the court answers in “unique language” and is known for his “linguistic” expressions, was unable to identify President Jagdeo as the “King Kong” of Guyanese political folklore that Freddie Kissoon wrote about in the article that is at the centre of the libel suit.
Dr Luncheon – who is also Head of the Presidential Secretariat and Cabinet Secretary – is President Jagdeo’s chief witness in the case. President Jagdeo is suing for $10 million, claiming that a column entitled “King Kong sent his goons to disrupt the conference” pointed to Jagdeo as “King Kong.” The President has claimed that the article suggests that he is a racist and that “by extension, the State and Government of Guyana, practise racism as an ideology, dogma, philosophy and policy.”
It was when the President’s lead attorney, Anil Nandlall, stood up on a point of objection and pleaded to the court that his client is “no ordinary” citizen” by virtue of him being the President and Commander-in-chief that the defense team protested. Hughes, who is representing Kissoon, said that while the President enjoys immunity from prosecution, by virtue of him suing for libel, he has stepped out of that zone of protection that the law affords him and is therefore an “ordinary citizen” just like the defendants. Justice Reynolds said that he would not pronounce on whether the President is barred from immunity in this case but would address it if the matter is brought before him at some point during the case.
Dr Luncheon faced questioning for an estimated three hours yesterday. Several of the questions directed at him were objected to by Nandlall who consistently agitated for relevance. When it came to the specific article written by Freddie Kissoon, Dr Luncheon told the court that he could not identify President Jagdeo as the one who is referred to in the two mentions of “King Kong” in the article written by Kissoon. The day’s proceedings began with attorney Hughes continuing to question Dr Luncheon on the “King Kong” character in Guyana’s political folklore, which he said on Tuesday, was used to identify President Forbes Burnham in the 1980s.
Dr Luncheon was asked if he knew one of the attributes of “King Kong” to be that he is an “unpleasant looking fella.” “Not that I am aware of,” Dr Luncheon replied. He was then asked if he identified “King Kong” as being of the ilk of a “caveman.” Again, he replied that he was not aware of that.
The Cabinet Secretary was then asked if he knew of “King Kong” having “goons”. To this he said he was also not aware, but when questioned further identified “King Kong” as being a character known for violence. He was then asked if he knew that in the folklore of King Kong if the creature is known to have characters in opposition to him. This question brought Nandlall’s first agitated objection, saying he didn’t know much about folklore and didn’t know that Dr Luncheon had expansive knowledge of political folklore. The Judge allowed the question and Dr Luncheon responded that he was not aware of this “adversarial” aspect of the King Kong character.
However, he later told the court that King Kong of the 1980s did have victims. Asked to name these, he said that the victims were political and civil organisations, and further detailed these to mean the People’s Progressive Party, the Working People’s Alliance, the Guyana Council of Churches, the Bar Association and others who received “King Kong type attention.” Asked to say what this “King Kong type attention” was, Dr Luncheon defined this to mean aggression, public diatribe (which he later equated to being abused in public) and threats. After this, Dr Luncheon was directed to Kissoon’s column and the two references to King Kong. Having being asked to read the article, Dr Luncheon concluded that Freddie Kissoon did not make any specific reference to any person in talking about “King Kong.” “No specific individual is identified,” Dr Luncheon stated.
Dr Luncheon was asked if he accepted that Kissoon was an academic who does research, and that by norm, academics do research and make their own conclusions. Dr Luncheon agreed. He further agreed that in the article in question, Kissoon wrote about his research finding, which in comparing the presidencies of Desmond Hoyte, Dr Cheddi Jagan, Janet Jagan and Bharrat Jagdeo, identified Jagdeo’s exercise of power as being driven by ideological racism. Dr Luncheon agreed that this is what he understood.
Dr Luncheon was then asked that of the presidencies that Kissoon compared, if it would be correct to say that it was only Jagdeo’s presidency that the head of every arm of the government – the legislature, judiciary and the executive – are headed by Indians. Dr Luncheon said he did not have that information in his possession. Attorney Hughes then sought to point out the heads of various arms of the government during the presidents under consideration, but in most cases Dr Luncheon could not answer authoritatively. “The chronology escapes me,” he said.
Another point that saw extensive questioning was the construction of the Berbice River Bridge. Dr Luncheon was first asked if he agreed that there would be an economic impact on the communities where the bridge was situated. To this he agreed. However, when he was later asked if the cessation of the ferry service with the advent of the bridge, meant that the economic well being of New Amsterdam was affected, Dr Luncheon said he was not aware of the relationship between the existence of the ferry service and the prosperity of the township of New Amsterdam. This response came after Dr Luncheon agreed that the Cabinet, chaired by the President, had not accepted the recommendation of a feasibility study which suggested that the least cost option for the bridge would be upstream from Everton.
Dr Luncheon said he was not aware of that suggestion of least cost options as contained in the feasibility study under question. Just prior to that question, Dr Luncheon was quizzed on the racial composition of villages from Everton to New Amsterdam. Asked if he agreed that those villages are predominantly inhabited by people of African ancestry, Dr Luncheon said he was not familiar with the racial composition of those villages. He later agreed that the village at which the bridge now terminates on the eastern side is Palymyra, which he admitted is composed mainly of Indians.
Source
SEPTEMBER 22, 2011 | BY KNEWS | FILED UNDER NEWS
President Bharrat Jagdeo is an “ordinary” person and does not come with the coat of immunity the law confers on him in the libel case brought by the President against Kaieteur News columnist Freddie Kissoon, and the newspaper’s editor-in-chief and publishers. This was the argument by attorney Nigel Hughes when the case continued yesterday before Justice Brassington Reynolds. Dr Roger Luncheon, whom the President’s attorney told the court answers in “unique language” and is known for his “linguistic” expressions, was unable to identify President Jagdeo as the “King Kong” of Guyanese political folklore that Freddie Kissoon wrote about in the article that is at the centre of the libel suit.
Dr Luncheon – who is also Head of the Presidential Secretariat and Cabinet Secretary – is President Jagdeo’s chief witness in the case. President Jagdeo is suing for $10 million, claiming that a column entitled “King Kong sent his goons to disrupt the conference” pointed to Jagdeo as “King Kong.” The President has claimed that the article suggests that he is a racist and that “by extension, the State and Government of Guyana, practise racism as an ideology, dogma, philosophy and policy.”
It was when the President’s lead attorney, Anil Nandlall, stood up on a point of objection and pleaded to the court that his client is “no ordinary” citizen” by virtue of him being the President and Commander-in-chief that the defense team protested. Hughes, who is representing Kissoon, said that while the President enjoys immunity from prosecution, by virtue of him suing for libel, he has stepped out of that zone of protection that the law affords him and is therefore an “ordinary citizen” just like the defendants. Justice Reynolds said that he would not pronounce on whether the President is barred from immunity in this case but would address it if the matter is brought before him at some point during the case.
Dr Luncheon faced questioning for an estimated three hours yesterday. Several of the questions directed at him were objected to by Nandlall who consistently agitated for relevance. When it came to the specific article written by Freddie Kissoon, Dr Luncheon told the court that he could not identify President Jagdeo as the one who is referred to in the two mentions of “King Kong” in the article written by Kissoon. The day’s proceedings began with attorney Hughes continuing to question Dr Luncheon on the “King Kong” character in Guyana’s political folklore, which he said on Tuesday, was used to identify President Forbes Burnham in the 1980s.
Dr Luncheon was asked if he knew one of the attributes of “King Kong” to be that he is an “unpleasant looking fella.” “Not that I am aware of,” Dr Luncheon replied. He was then asked if he identified “King Kong” as being of the ilk of a “caveman.” Again, he replied that he was not aware of that.
The Cabinet Secretary was then asked if he knew of “King Kong” having “goons”. To this he said he was also not aware, but when questioned further identified “King Kong” as being a character known for violence. He was then asked if he knew that in the folklore of King Kong if the creature is known to have characters in opposition to him. This question brought Nandlall’s first agitated objection, saying he didn’t know much about folklore and didn’t know that Dr Luncheon had expansive knowledge of political folklore. The Judge allowed the question and Dr Luncheon responded that he was not aware of this “adversarial” aspect of the King Kong character.
However, he later told the court that King Kong of the 1980s did have victims. Asked to name these, he said that the victims were political and civil organisations, and further detailed these to mean the People’s Progressive Party, the Working People’s Alliance, the Guyana Council of Churches, the Bar Association and others who received “King Kong type attention.” Asked to say what this “King Kong type attention” was, Dr Luncheon defined this to mean aggression, public diatribe (which he later equated to being abused in public) and threats. After this, Dr Luncheon was directed to Kissoon’s column and the two references to King Kong. Having being asked to read the article, Dr Luncheon concluded that Freddie Kissoon did not make any specific reference to any person in talking about “King Kong.” “No specific individual is identified,” Dr Luncheon stated.
Dr Luncheon was asked if he accepted that Kissoon was an academic who does research, and that by norm, academics do research and make their own conclusions. Dr Luncheon agreed. He further agreed that in the article in question, Kissoon wrote about his research finding, which in comparing the presidencies of Desmond Hoyte, Dr Cheddi Jagan, Janet Jagan and Bharrat Jagdeo, identified Jagdeo’s exercise of power as being driven by ideological racism. Dr Luncheon agreed that this is what he understood.
Dr Luncheon was then asked that of the presidencies that Kissoon compared, if it would be correct to say that it was only Jagdeo’s presidency that the head of every arm of the government – the legislature, judiciary and the executive – are headed by Indians. Dr Luncheon said he did not have that information in his possession. Attorney Hughes then sought to point out the heads of various arms of the government during the presidents under consideration, but in most cases Dr Luncheon could not answer authoritatively. “The chronology escapes me,” he said.
Another point that saw extensive questioning was the construction of the Berbice River Bridge. Dr Luncheon was first asked if he agreed that there would be an economic impact on the communities where the bridge was situated. To this he agreed. However, when he was later asked if the cessation of the ferry service with the advent of the bridge, meant that the economic well being of New Amsterdam was affected, Dr Luncheon said he was not aware of the relationship between the existence of the ferry service and the prosperity of the township of New Amsterdam. This response came after Dr Luncheon agreed that the Cabinet, chaired by the President, had not accepted the recommendation of a feasibility study which suggested that the least cost option for the bridge would be upstream from Everton.
Dr Luncheon said he was not aware of that suggestion of least cost options as contained in the feasibility study under question. Just prior to that question, Dr Luncheon was quizzed on the racial composition of villages from Everton to New Amsterdam. Asked if he agreed that those villages are predominantly inhabited by people of African ancestry, Dr Luncheon said he was not familiar with the racial composition of those villages. He later agreed that the village at which the bridge now terminates on the eastern side is Palymyra, which he admitted is composed mainly of Indians.
Source
Former Member
Kissoon's article doesn't change Luncheon's view on Jagdeo
Written by Denis Scott Chabrol Thursday, 22 September 2011 17:20
Cabinet Secretary, Dr. Roger Luncheon, the chief witness in the GUY$10 million libel case brought by President Bharrat Jagdeo against Kaieteur News newspaper on Thursday said the article in question did not change his view of the Guyanese leader. “No Sir,” Luncheon replied when he was asked by Defence Lawyer, Nigel Hughes “did you permit this article to change your opinion of the plaintiff.”
Luncheon told the High Court trial being presided over by Justice Brassington Reynolds that he could not say whether the June 28, 2010 column titled ‘King Kong sent his goons to disrupt the conference’ was an unusual writing. While conceding that Kissoon has been a critic of Jagdeo, Luncheon said he could not conclude that the article was an “unusual departure” because he was not a frequent reader of the author’s writings.
Jagdeo filed the lawsuit, arguing that he was libeled because Kissoon called him an “ideological racist” in the article.
The Head of the Presidential Secretariat could not recall being questioned by the media to comment on a purported statement by President Jagdeo in the August 21, 2011 edition of the Wall Street Journal that “India is alive and well in Guyana.” Luncheon also could not recall it ever being said that any country on the African continent is alive and well in Guyana. Continuing to cross examine Luncheon on the racial composition of decision-making government bodies, Hughes did not get the Head of the Presidential Secretariat to admit that no African Guyanese lawyer was appointed to head any of the Rice Assessment Boards. He could not confirm that the Rice Assessment Boards in Regions 2,3,4,5 and 6 during Jagdeo’s tenure were all of East Indian descent.
Under cross examination by Attorney-at-Law, Christopher Ram, Luncheon rejected suggestions that the contract of career diplomat, Cheryl Miles as Ambassador to Brazil was not renewed and she was replaced by non-career diplomat, Harry Narine Nawbatt was because of ethnicity. Ram noted that Miles, a former Director General of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, is the holder of Masters Degree and is fluent in Portuguese and Spanish. “I don’t accept that. It wasn’t the only qualification that determine choices of nominations for ambassadorship,” Luncheon told the court. “That is not true. It ignores the difference between career and non-career diplomats,” he added.
On the matter of why acting Charge D’Affaires at the Guyana Embassy of China, Cecil Pollydore was recalled rather than confirmed although he was a career foreign service officer, Luncheon explained that the officer was replace by Cho-Ann Hing who was then replaced by Ambassador Professor, David Dabydeen “ who we consider an international public servant for Guyana, as a diplomat.” Turning his attention to the allocation of resources for the United Nations-designated International Year for People of African Descent, Ram failed to get Luncheon’s endorsement of a policy document and calendar of events that was published by the Ministry of Culture Youth and Sport. “This is not the document approved by cabinet to be laid in the National Assembly,” Luncheon told Ram. Asked whether the GUY$32 million for the programmatic activities in the cabinet approved document was never passed in the budget or supplementary provisions, Luncheon said he was uncertain but he was willing to concede that it may very well be so.
Source
Written by Denis Scott Chabrol Thursday, 22 September 2011 17:20
Cabinet Secretary, Dr. Roger Luncheon, the chief witness in the GUY$10 million libel case brought by President Bharrat Jagdeo against Kaieteur News newspaper on Thursday said the article in question did not change his view of the Guyanese leader. “No Sir,” Luncheon replied when he was asked by Defence Lawyer, Nigel Hughes “did you permit this article to change your opinion of the plaintiff.” Luncheon told the High Court trial being presided over by Justice Brassington Reynolds that he could not say whether the June 28, 2010 column titled ‘King Kong sent his goons to disrupt the conference’ was an unusual writing. While conceding that Kissoon has been a critic of Jagdeo, Luncheon said he could not conclude that the article was an “unusual departure” because he was not a frequent reader of the author’s writings.
Jagdeo filed the lawsuit, arguing that he was libeled because Kissoon called him an “ideological racist” in the article.
The Head of the Presidential Secretariat could not recall being questioned by the media to comment on a purported statement by President Jagdeo in the August 21, 2011 edition of the Wall Street Journal that “India is alive and well in Guyana.” Luncheon also could not recall it ever being said that any country on the African continent is alive and well in Guyana. Continuing to cross examine Luncheon on the racial composition of decision-making government bodies, Hughes did not get the Head of the Presidential Secretariat to admit that no African Guyanese lawyer was appointed to head any of the Rice Assessment Boards. He could not confirm that the Rice Assessment Boards in Regions 2,3,4,5 and 6 during Jagdeo’s tenure were all of East Indian descent.
Under cross examination by Attorney-at-Law, Christopher Ram, Luncheon rejected suggestions that the contract of career diplomat, Cheryl Miles as Ambassador to Brazil was not renewed and she was replaced by non-career diplomat, Harry Narine Nawbatt was because of ethnicity. Ram noted that Miles, a former Director General of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, is the holder of Masters Degree and is fluent in Portuguese and Spanish. “I don’t accept that. It wasn’t the only qualification that determine choices of nominations for ambassadorship,” Luncheon told the court. “That is not true. It ignores the difference between career and non-career diplomats,” he added.
On the matter of why acting Charge D’Affaires at the Guyana Embassy of China, Cecil Pollydore was recalled rather than confirmed although he was a career foreign service officer, Luncheon explained that the officer was replace by Cho-Ann Hing who was then replaced by Ambassador Professor, David Dabydeen “ who we consider an international public servant for Guyana, as a diplomat.” Turning his attention to the allocation of resources for the United Nations-designated International Year for People of African Descent, Ram failed to get Luncheon’s endorsement of a policy document and calendar of events that was published by the Ministry of Culture Youth and Sport. “This is not the document approved by cabinet to be laid in the National Assembly,” Luncheon told Ram. Asked whether the GUY$32 million for the programmatic activities in the cabinet approved document was never passed in the budget or supplementary provisions, Luncheon said he was uncertain but he was willing to concede that it may very well be so.
Source
Is it milk or hot soup that's turning the lunchman's beard white?
Former Member
‘King Kong’ article didn’t change opinion on Jagdeo - Luncheon
By ZOISA FRASER | LOCAL | FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 23, 2011
Dr. Roger Luncheon yesterday said that the racial connotations contained in the article that triggered President Bharrat Jagdeo’s $10M libel suit did not charge his perception of the Head of State. Luncheon, Head of the Presidential Secretariat, continued testimony under cross examination in the case yesterday before Justice Brassington Reynolds. Jagdeo brought the libel suit against Kaieteur News and columnist Freddie Kissoon based on a June 28, 2010 article, titled ‘King Kong sent his goons to disrupt the conference.” Luncheon, responding to questions by defence attorney Nigel Hughes, was asked if the article changed his opinion of the president. “No sir, it did not,” he replied.
He conceded that Kissoon had been a critic of Jagdeo for several years, but said that he was not a frequent reader of “Mr. Kissoon’s writings” and as a result he was unable to confirm whether the article was a usual production. Earlier, Luncheon was asked about that the contents of a Wall Street Journal article, and he said that he could not recall being questioned by the local press about the statement, “India is alive and well in Guyana,” attributed to Jagdeo in the August 21, 2011 edition of the paper. He added that he hosted post cabinet briefings and members of the press have solicited “my recall and explanations of statements attributed to the president.” He testified too that he had no recollection of the specific statement “countries of the African continent are alive and well in Guyana.”
Meanwhile, asked if he would agree that the chairperson of the Rice Assessment Boards for regions 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6, who were appointed during Jagdeo’s term, were all Indo-Guyanese, Luncheon said he could not confirm, although pointing out that he would not be in a position to deny the suggestion. Lead lawyer for Jagdeo’s legal team, Anil Nandlall, objected when Hughes asked whether Bibi Shadick was once the Chairman of the Rice Assessment Board for Region Three. According to Nandlall, “the answers to these collateral questions are final.” He noted that the witness clearly said that he could not confirm. The judge later ruled that the suggestion was allowable. Luncheon in his response said that he recalled Shadick being appointed as a member of the board but could not recall for which region. He could not recall whether any person of African descent was every appointed to the Board.
‘Borderline’
Luncheon was also cross-examined by attorney Christopher Ram, during which there were a series of objections by Nandlall, who argued the irrelevance of the questioning. The judge on a few occasions warned Ram that he was very close to the “borderline” with his line of questioning and urged him to move on. During the questioning, Luncheon dismissed suggestions that the renewal of the contract of Cheryl Miles as Ambassador to Brazil was based on her race. “I reject that contention, sir,” he said. He noted that she was given the green light to be Ambassador to Brazil by the president, after she retired as Director General in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs at the age of 55. Luncheon, who acknowledged that government recognises that Brazil is very important to Guyana’s development, admitted that her contract could have been renewed by government, while pointing out that her “tenure as Ambassador was served at the discretion of the administration.” Luncheon could not state Miles’ age in 2008 but said he knew that she was over age 55.
When questioned about Miles’ qualifications, Nandlall objected, saying it had nothing to do with the case. However Ram explained that he was merely trying to compare Miles’ qualifications with that of her successor, Harry Narine Nawbatt. Asked about the age of Nawbatt, Luncheon said he did not know. It was later put to him that Nawbatt was 63 years old, the same age at Miles. Meanwhile, Luncheon acknowledged that some of the permanent secretaries of several ministries, including the Ministry of Finance and the Ministry of Local Government and Regional Development, were Indo-Guyanese. However, he noted that some of those identified to him were of African descent, including the Colin Croal, the Permanent Secretary of the Ministry of Amerindian Affairs. “I have given testimony before that I recognise him as afro Guyanese,” he said. He also acknowledged that most of the 10 Regional Executive Officers are Indo-Guyanese.
Ram was, however, unable to get Luncheon to embrace a policy document which was reportedly prepared and published by the Ministry of Culture, Youth and Sport, in observance of the International Year for People of African Descent. After looking through the document, which was provided by Ram, he told the court that it was not the document which had a budget of $32 million and which was approved by cabinet. He said that a number of submissions were made by the Ministry and the document was finally adopted. Luncheon said that he would hesitate to confirm whether the document was shared with any African Guyanese organisation, “although I strongly believe that it has been.”
The hearing continues today.
Source
By ZOISA FRASER | LOCAL | FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 23, 2011
Dr. Roger Luncheon yesterday said that the racial connotations contained in the article that triggered President Bharrat Jagdeo’s $10M libel suit did not charge his perception of the Head of State. Luncheon, Head of the Presidential Secretariat, continued testimony under cross examination in the case yesterday before Justice Brassington Reynolds. Jagdeo brought the libel suit against Kaieteur News and columnist Freddie Kissoon based on a June 28, 2010 article, titled ‘King Kong sent his goons to disrupt the conference.” Luncheon, responding to questions by defence attorney Nigel Hughes, was asked if the article changed his opinion of the president. “No sir, it did not,” he replied.
He conceded that Kissoon had been a critic of Jagdeo for several years, but said that he was not a frequent reader of “Mr. Kissoon’s writings” and as a result he was unable to confirm whether the article was a usual production. Earlier, Luncheon was asked about that the contents of a Wall Street Journal article, and he said that he could not recall being questioned by the local press about the statement, “India is alive and well in Guyana,” attributed to Jagdeo in the August 21, 2011 edition of the paper. He added that he hosted post cabinet briefings and members of the press have solicited “my recall and explanations of statements attributed to the president.” He testified too that he had no recollection of the specific statement “countries of the African continent are alive and well in Guyana.”
Meanwhile, asked if he would agree that the chairperson of the Rice Assessment Boards for regions 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6, who were appointed during Jagdeo’s term, were all Indo-Guyanese, Luncheon said he could not confirm, although pointing out that he would not be in a position to deny the suggestion. Lead lawyer for Jagdeo’s legal team, Anil Nandlall, objected when Hughes asked whether Bibi Shadick was once the Chairman of the Rice Assessment Board for Region Three. According to Nandlall, “the answers to these collateral questions are final.” He noted that the witness clearly said that he could not confirm. The judge later ruled that the suggestion was allowable. Luncheon in his response said that he recalled Shadick being appointed as a member of the board but could not recall for which region. He could not recall whether any person of African descent was every appointed to the Board.
‘Borderline’
Luncheon was also cross-examined by attorney Christopher Ram, during which there were a series of objections by Nandlall, who argued the irrelevance of the questioning. The judge on a few occasions warned Ram that he was very close to the “borderline” with his line of questioning and urged him to move on. During the questioning, Luncheon dismissed suggestions that the renewal of the contract of Cheryl Miles as Ambassador to Brazil was based on her race. “I reject that contention, sir,” he said. He noted that she was given the green light to be Ambassador to Brazil by the president, after she retired as Director General in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs at the age of 55. Luncheon, who acknowledged that government recognises that Brazil is very important to Guyana’s development, admitted that her contract could have been renewed by government, while pointing out that her “tenure as Ambassador was served at the discretion of the administration.” Luncheon could not state Miles’ age in 2008 but said he knew that she was over age 55.
When questioned about Miles’ qualifications, Nandlall objected, saying it had nothing to do with the case. However Ram explained that he was merely trying to compare Miles’ qualifications with that of her successor, Harry Narine Nawbatt. Asked about the age of Nawbatt, Luncheon said he did not know. It was later put to him that Nawbatt was 63 years old, the same age at Miles. Meanwhile, Luncheon acknowledged that some of the permanent secretaries of several ministries, including the Ministry of Finance and the Ministry of Local Government and Regional Development, were Indo-Guyanese. However, he noted that some of those identified to him were of African descent, including the Colin Croal, the Permanent Secretary of the Ministry of Amerindian Affairs. “I have given testimony before that I recognise him as afro Guyanese,” he said. He also acknowledged that most of the 10 Regional Executive Officers are Indo-Guyanese.
Ram was, however, unable to get Luncheon to embrace a policy document which was reportedly prepared and published by the Ministry of Culture, Youth and Sport, in observance of the International Year for People of African Descent. After looking through the document, which was provided by Ram, he told the court that it was not the document which had a budget of $32 million and which was approved by cabinet. He said that a number of submissions were made by the Ministry and the document was finally adopted. Luncheon said that he would hesitate to confirm whether the document was shared with any African Guyanese organisation, “although I strongly believe that it has been.”
The hearing continues today.
Source
Former Member
Freddie vs. Jagdeo libel case…Kissoon’s article does not change my views on Jagdeo – Luncheon
SEPTEMBER 23, 2011 | BY KNEWS | FILED UNDER NEWS
As the libel case against columnist Freddie Kissoon, National Media and Publishing Company, the publishers of Kaieteur News, and the newspaper’s Editor-in- Chief Adam Harris continued yesterday in the High court, chief witness Cabinet Secretary, Dr. Roger Luncheon under cross examination said that the article which was the basis for the lawsuit did not change his view about President Bharrat Jagdeo. Jagdeo is suing for $10 million, claiming that a column entitled “King Kong sent his goons to disrupt the conference” pointed to him (Jagdeo) as ‘King Kong’. The President has claimed that the article suggests that he is a racist and that “by extension, the State and Government of Guyana, practice racism as an ideology, dogma, philosophy and policy.” The presiding judge is Brassington Reynolds.
Attorney at law Nigel Hughes asked the cabinet secretary whether he would normally or frequently respond to statements made about the plaintiff (President Jagdeo). Luncheon disclosed that he would frequently do this. He was then asked if it would be correct to say that he has a weekly press conference about various attributes concerning the plaintiff. Luncheon said he holds a weekly press conference and would inform the media about different attributes of the president. As the cross examination continued, Hughes asked Luncheon if he was familiar with the Wall Street Journal. Luncheon answered in the affirmative. The witness was then asked if he believes the Wall Street Journal had a decent publishing reputation. Luncheon said he was aware of its content and it was widely stated. The witness was then asked about an article dated August 21, 2011, in the same journal, where the plaintiff was quoted as stating “India is alive and well in Guyana”.
“I have no recollection of being questioned or asked to comment on the statement at any recent press conference,” Luncheon told the court. The witness was then asked by Hughes on whether he had heard the plaintiff stating that any country from the African continent was “alive and well”. Luncheon said that he has no recollection of a specific statement in that regard Luncheon was then asked if he was aware that Freddie Kissoon was a critic of the plaintiff. To which he said he conceded that Kissoon was a critic of the President. The chief witness was then asked if he had read the article in question and if he thought it was unusual article by Kissoon. Luncheon stated that he was not a frequent reader of Mr Kissoon’s artcles and as such he could not state if it was usual or unusual.
He was then asked if after reading the article, he permitted the article to change his opinion about the plaintiff. “No Sir,” Luncheon replied, “the article did not change my opinion about the plaintiff.” Hughes also questioned the witness about the composition of high ranking governmental decision-making bodies. The question was put to Luncheon about the fact that no Afro Guyanese was selected by the Rice Assessment Boards, in regions two, three, four, five and six during the tenure of the plaintiff. Luncheon indicated that he was neither able to confirm that statement, nor would he be in a position to deny it. There was an objection by lawyer for the plaintiff, Anil Nandlall, with regard to the questions surrounding this. However it was overruled by the judge.
The names of the Indo-Guyanese representatives were called out, but Luncheon said he could not confirm or deny it. This brought the cross examination from Nigel Hughes to come to an end. Attorney-at-Law, Christopher Ram, was second in line to take up the cross examination against Luncheon. The cabinet secretary refused to accept that former ambassador to Brazil Mrs. Cheryl Miles was not reappointed, but was replaced by a lesser qualified and non-career diplomat Mr. Harry Narine Nawbatt, because he was an Indo-Guyanese. The court was told that Mrs. Miles had a Master’s degree and was bilingual, and that Nawbatt did not have the same qualifications. “I don’t accept that……it wasn’t only the qualification that determines choices of nominations for ambassadorship,” Luncheon stated. Luncheon was also questioned about the fact that Charge D’Affaires at the Guyana Embassy of China, Cecil Pollydore, was recalled instead of being confirmed. He was later replaced by Cho-Ann Hing who was subsequently replaced by Professor David Dabydeen.
The matter continues today.
Source
SEPTEMBER 23, 2011 | BY KNEWS | FILED UNDER NEWS
As the libel case against columnist Freddie Kissoon, National Media and Publishing Company, the publishers of Kaieteur News, and the newspaper’s Editor-in- Chief Adam Harris continued yesterday in the High court, chief witness Cabinet Secretary, Dr. Roger Luncheon under cross examination said that the article which was the basis for the lawsuit did not change his view about President Bharrat Jagdeo. Jagdeo is suing for $10 million, claiming that a column entitled “King Kong sent his goons to disrupt the conference” pointed to him (Jagdeo) as ‘King Kong’. The President has claimed that the article suggests that he is a racist and that “by extension, the State and Government of Guyana, practice racism as an ideology, dogma, philosophy and policy.” The presiding judge is Brassington Reynolds.
Attorney at law Nigel Hughes asked the cabinet secretary whether he would normally or frequently respond to statements made about the plaintiff (President Jagdeo). Luncheon disclosed that he would frequently do this. He was then asked if it would be correct to say that he has a weekly press conference about various attributes concerning the plaintiff. Luncheon said he holds a weekly press conference and would inform the media about different attributes of the president. As the cross examination continued, Hughes asked Luncheon if he was familiar with the Wall Street Journal. Luncheon answered in the affirmative. The witness was then asked if he believes the Wall Street Journal had a decent publishing reputation. Luncheon said he was aware of its content and it was widely stated. The witness was then asked about an article dated August 21, 2011, in the same journal, where the plaintiff was quoted as stating “India is alive and well in Guyana”.
“I have no recollection of being questioned or asked to comment on the statement at any recent press conference,” Luncheon told the court. The witness was then asked by Hughes on whether he had heard the plaintiff stating that any country from the African continent was “alive and well”. Luncheon said that he has no recollection of a specific statement in that regard Luncheon was then asked if he was aware that Freddie Kissoon was a critic of the plaintiff. To which he said he conceded that Kissoon was a critic of the President. The chief witness was then asked if he had read the article in question and if he thought it was unusual article by Kissoon. Luncheon stated that he was not a frequent reader of Mr Kissoon’s artcles and as such he could not state if it was usual or unusual.
He was then asked if after reading the article, he permitted the article to change his opinion about the plaintiff. “No Sir,” Luncheon replied, “the article did not change my opinion about the plaintiff.” Hughes also questioned the witness about the composition of high ranking governmental decision-making bodies. The question was put to Luncheon about the fact that no Afro Guyanese was selected by the Rice Assessment Boards, in regions two, three, four, five and six during the tenure of the plaintiff. Luncheon indicated that he was neither able to confirm that statement, nor would he be in a position to deny it. There was an objection by lawyer for the plaintiff, Anil Nandlall, with regard to the questions surrounding this. However it was overruled by the judge.
The names of the Indo-Guyanese representatives were called out, but Luncheon said he could not confirm or deny it. This brought the cross examination from Nigel Hughes to come to an end. Attorney-at-Law, Christopher Ram, was second in line to take up the cross examination against Luncheon. The cabinet secretary refused to accept that former ambassador to Brazil Mrs. Cheryl Miles was not reappointed, but was replaced by a lesser qualified and non-career diplomat Mr. Harry Narine Nawbatt, because he was an Indo-Guyanese. The court was told that Mrs. Miles had a Master’s degree and was bilingual, and that Nawbatt did not have the same qualifications. “I don’t accept that……it wasn’t only the qualification that determines choices of nominations for ambassadorship,” Luncheon stated. Luncheon was also questioned about the fact that Charge D’Affaires at the Guyana Embassy of China, Cecil Pollydore, was recalled instead of being confirmed. He was later replaced by Cho-Ann Hing who was subsequently replaced by Professor David Dabydeen.
The matter continues today.
Source
jags (Guest)
9. (C) Greene’s new position will have consequences on
foreign assistance involving the GPF. Post does not
currently have any programs with the GPF that fall under the
Foreign Assistance Act or the Arms Export Control Act.
However, there are other types of assistance that it would
not be prudent to implement as long as Greene is in charge.
For example, DEA told Post it cannot proceed with
establishing a vetted anti-narcotics unit if Greene is
Commissioner. Also, the ATF is pulling out of its scheduled
installation of a gun-trace computer terminal to help the GPF
track firearms. Post will continue to evaluate carefully all
proposed cooperation and interaction with the GPF — to
determine how it will advance USG interests and how the
public will interpret it.
Luncheon was in the middle of this discussion I cannot believe that this man sacrificed the lives of Guyanese for his friend henry de greene. This is not cool man not cool at all.
This is gonna create a stink in Guyana here.
foreign assistance involving the GPF. Post does not
currently have any programs with the GPF that fall under the
Foreign Assistance Act or the Arms Export Control Act.
However, there are other types of assistance that it would
not be prudent to implement as long as Greene is in charge.
For example, DEA told Post it cannot proceed with
establishing a vetted anti-narcotics unit if Greene is
Commissioner. Also, the ATF is pulling out of its scheduled
installation of a gun-trace computer terminal to help the GPF
track firearms. Post will continue to evaluate carefully all
proposed cooperation and interaction with the GPF — to
determine how it will advance USG interests and how the
public will interpret it.
Luncheon was in the middle of this discussion I cannot believe that this man sacrificed the lives of Guyanese for his friend henry de greene. This is not cool man not cool at all.
This is gonna create a stink in Guyana here.
Add Reply
Sign In To Reply
125 online (1 member
/
124 guests)