Latest update April 20th, 2024 12:59 AM
Nov 12, 2014 News
…House Speaker vows to also stay silent
The 22-year-old man who moved to challenge the court order that prevents him from publishing in the print or electronic
media, any material relating to allegations he made against Speaker of the National Assembly, Raphael Trotman, saw his efforts rejected in court yesterday.
Chief Justice (Ag) Ian Chang has dismissed the appeal Johnny Anthony Welshman filed to have the injunction overturned. The House Speaker has also undertaken to remain silent on the issue.
The injunction which was granted on September 22, last, by the acting Chief Justice also ordered Welshman to remove all malicious content from his Facebook page. Welshman had, in response, moved to the High Court seeking to have the order discharged.
The Chief Justice, after listening to Trotman and Welshman’s arguments over the past weeks, yesterday ruled that the injunction, which prevents Welshman from publishing or speaking about the “issue” in the public or on his Facebook Page, stays.
Welshman has accused the Speaker of sexually molesting him over ten years ago; an allegation which Trotman has, at all times, categorically denied, asserting that it is a political plot designed to destroy him.
The young man and his attorney, Peter Hugh, as well as Trotman and his counsel, Nigel Hughes, were present when the decision was handed down in the Chief Justice’s chambers.
It was approximately thirty-five minutes after the session convened that Welshman was seen storming out, leaving the Chief Justice’s door ajar. The “ruckus” he created thereafter caused him to be cautioned and threatened to be arrested by police officers.
Welshman proclaimed “This has politics written all over it…The Chief Justice on last hearing, he had a hearing with
Freddie Kissoon and Mr. Jagdeo. They would have to lock me up because I am telling you, I have him on camera.”
Being grilled by reporters, Welshman insisted that this was a political ploy and further threatened to release recordings and videos to the media.
Welshman exclaimed “same nonsense, pure politics… I was given an undertaking that I cannot say anything on my social media…Guyana has no cyber laws!” Passionately, Welshman argued that because of this, an order barring him from publishing information on his Facebook Page is wrong.
“According to the laws, the Chief Justice cannot bar anyone from their social media, but let me tell Guyana that this will be big bacchanal and I have my documents to back it up,” Welshman fumed.
“Let them charge me for contempt because this is nonsense and its pure dirty politics that they’re playing with. Let me tell the acting Chief Justice this…you cannot bar nobody from the social media site…let me tell you, they will have to charge me on contempt proceedings and I want it big in the headline,” Welshman expressed.
Moments later, the remaining parties emerged. Amid insulting statements being spoken by an angry Welshman, Hughes explained that the injunction continues until there is a determination of the matter.
The Speaker, he explained, has made a $50 million claim for damages done to his reputation as a result of statements made by Welshman.
“It is at the trial that the Plaintiff (Trotman) has to establish his reputation has suffered injury as a result of Mr. Welshman’s statement and the places where he made those comments,” Hughes clarified.
The lawyer further explained that the information is accessible on the World Wide Web, and as a result, every time someone launches a “search” with his client’s name these allegations will come up; adding “that’s an injury to his reputation.”
Hughes said Welshman’s behaviour in the Chamber was “rather unfortunate”, saying he disregarded the instructions
of his own Counsel to the extent that he walked out of the court.
In a response to Welshman’s claims, Hughes said “this is not an issue of cyber laws; this is a case of libel. Whether or not there are cyber laws, the fact is that Mr. Welshman published statements that were hostile and adverse and injured my client’s reputation whether they were in cyber space, whether they were in print or wherever he spoke those words, they were published.”
Hughes said in those circumstances, as long as Trotman establishes that they (the allegations) were published, and that there was no basis for it, he is entitled to damages.
The trial is likely to come up within the next eighteen months to two years; until such time Welshman remains barred from adding to the allegations that are already in the public domain.
Meanwhile, Hugh, who in the wake of Welshman’s outburst spoke little yesterday, had issued a statement saying that it was unacceptable behaviour on Trotman’s part to continue to continually attack the accuser of an alleged sexual assault, especially Welshman, who is restrained from publishing any material in relation to those allegations.
Where is the BETTER MANAGEMENT/RENEGOTIATION OF THE OIL CONTRACTS you promised Jagdeo?
Apr 20, 2024
– Elton Dharry and Dexter Marques to headline tonight’s card Kaieteur Sports – The Everest Cricket Club pavilion crackled with tension yesterday as the Guyana Boxing Board hosted its...Kaieteur News – Once a habit has been drilled into you, it returns almost automatically when you return to the setting... more
By Sir Ronald Sanders Waterfalls Magazine – On April 10, the Permanent Council of the Organization of American States... 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]