Judge orders AFC’s Ramjattan to pay Charrandas Persaud $7M for slander

A Demerara High Court Judge has ordered the leader of the AFC and former Public Security Minister, Khemraj Ramjattan to pay ex APNU/AFC parliamentarian, Charrandas Persaud $7M in damages for defamation.

Persaud, who is an Attorney-at-Law, and Guyana’s High Commissioner to India, had filed a lawsuit in 2019, accusing Ramjattan, who is also a lawyer, of making certain defamatory statements about him.

Persaud submitted that this happened after he had voted in favour of a no-confidence motion brought against the then APNU/AFC government by the PPP/C in December 2018.

The statements Persaud complained of were contained in the January 1, 2019 edition of the Stabroek News, December 18, 2018 edition of the Guyana Chronicle and on a live programme aired on Globe Span’s Facebook page.

Before High Court Judge Jo Ann Barlow, Persaud contended that the statements made by Ramjattan were intended to lower his reputation, character, morality and honesty as a lawyer in the eyes of right-thinking members of the public.

He further contended that the publications were blatantly false assertions and were understood to mean that he accepted monetary or other inducement or benefits for his “yes” vote in favour of the motion of no-confidence.

In February 2019, Persaud had caused his lawyer to write Ramjattan asking that he publicly retract the statements made during the live programme and offer an apology. He had also requested compensation for the damage done to his reputation.

Ramjattan, in response to Persaud’s claim, had contended that the words were not defamatory, stating that they were all political in nature. He also relied on the defences of fair comment and justification.

With reference to specific words, Ramjattan had said he meant Persaud acted like a Judas—that is to say he was a traitor and betrayed the party by voting in favour of the no-confidence motion.

Persaud presented no evidence to establish the causal link between Ramjattan and the publications in the newspapers and as such, the court made no pronouncement on the defamatory nature or otherwise of the statements.

The court, therefore, only addressed its mind to the interview Ramjattan did on the live programme. In analyzing whether the words were defamatory, Justice Barlow said that the sequence of events as set out by Ramjattan may at first blush, equate Persaud’s actions with the Biblical Judas.

“This court found that the statements were defamatory. They tend to lower [Persaud] in the estimation of right-thinking members of society and expose him to hatred, contempt or ridicule and cause other persons to shun or avoid him. The words went further than accusing [Persaud] of being disloyal. Those words viewed objectively spoke of dishonesty most foul,” Justice Barlow held in her July 25 judgement.

As such, she found that an award of $7M in damages is appropriate in the circumstances of this case. Ramjattan was also ordered to pay Persaud $150,000 in costs on or before August 25.

The Judge further ordered that he refrain from making statements that suggest that Persaud was in any way compensated financially for his vote on the no-confidence motion.

Persaud was represented by Attorneys-at-Law Christopher Ram and Christopher Thompson while Senior Counsel Roysdale Forde appeared for Ramjattan.