Roget claims defamation in letter to PM: Apologise or face court

Black Immigrant Daily News

News

Ancel Roget. File photo/Lincoln Holder

OWTU head Ancel Roget on Thursday moved towards claiming “aggravated and exemplary damages” from the Prime Minister over remarks published by Dr Rowley on his Facebook page on Monday.

The JTUM head ordered his attorney Kiel Taklalsingh to send to the PM a pre-action protocol letter for allegedly defamatory material.

The attorney said Roget had dedicated his life to fighting for the working class against oppression and, as JTUM head, must meet people from various sectors of society.

Taklalsingh said Roget’s reputation in TT’s industrial relations was of great value to himself and the hundreds of thousands of workers he represents.

Saying the article had been shared 350 times and commented on 928 times, Taklalsingh’s letter alleged Rowley’s statement had been “falsely and maliciously” published and had allegedly been calculated to damage and defame Roget in his personal and professional capacity, bringing his good name and reputation into odium and disrepute and sullying his reputation.

Taklalsingh said Rowley’s words, in their ordinary meaning, had suggested Roget had allegedly aided and abetted the commission of a criminal offence, including the obstruction of a public highway, and had been part of a criminal conspiracy towards this and, more so, was allegedly unfit to hold office as a labour leader.

“In essence, you accused my client of being involved in the illegal obstruction of highways throughout the country, and further suggested that he associates, aids and abets criminals in their nefarious activities.

Prime Minister Dr Rowley. File photo/Jeff K. Mayers

“That is patently false, and you were fully aware of the falseness of your accusations. These charges amount to a very serious libel against our client and have caused him considerable distress and embarrassment. The allegations made against him are false, and your attack on his reputation and character were completely unjustified.

“While we are mindful that in the cut and thrust of the political gayelle tempers often flare, we wish to reiterate that spurious allegations which are (allegedly) calculated to gain quick political points, and which are unsupported by verifiable information, ought to be deprecated.”

Taklalsingh spelt out the claim.

“Our client intends to make a claim against you for damages, including aggravated and exemplary damages, for slander and/or libel contained in the said words complained of.

“Further, having regard to the scurrilous and unfounded allegations which have hurt our client’s personal, national and international reputation, and which have lowered him in the estimation of reasonable persons in society, he can be expected to receive substantial damages for the publication of the said words.”

Saying Rowley’s remarks had appeared on various websites and in radio commentary, in and outside of TT, the attorney alleged the PM knew beforehand of such broadcasts and so implicitly authorised it.

Taklalsingh said Roget was urgently seeking from Rowley a “a full, unequivocal and unqualified retraction and apology” to be agreed by counsel and published in all daily newspapers in TT.

“Counsel has advised that Mr Roget is also entitled to substantial compensation for the injury caused to his reputation and feeling, including an award for aggravated and exemplary damages.

“In this regard, we are to invite your proposals.”

Taklalsingh asked Rowley to respond within 14 days.

“If no satisfactory response is received at these offices within this period, our instructions are to issue a claim against you and to expeditiously pursue same.”

NewsAmericasNow.com