Sharma’s wife suggested four- month suspension – Jagdeo

President Bharrat Jagdeo revealed that it was Chandra Narine Sharma’s wife, Savitree, who requested a four-month suspension, as he dispelled criticisms about the severity of his decision to suspend the broadcast of CNS Channel Six which was in violation of its licence.

Channel Six had its licence to broadcast suspended for four months by President Bharrat Jagdeo on Friday after its proprietor, Chandra Narine Sharma, met with the president.

At a press conference on Tuesday at the Office of President, the head of state said it was during the September 30 meeting between himself in his capacity as information minister and Sharma and his wife that the couple requested a reduction in the length of the suspension.

“I said, ‘what you think is a reasonable time? Is eight months unreasonable? What do you think is reasonable?’ She said ‘four months’; Savitree Sharma said four months, CN Sharma said two months.

This is what happened. And I said ‘ could you excuse me so I could consult with my people? Because I could be going below the recommendation of the ACB’, “Jagdeo revealed.

According to Jagdeo, the ACB (Advisory Committee on Broadcasting) had recommended a suspension of no less than six months and he had initially thought of making the suspension eight months. He slammed the Sharmas for being “unethical”, saying they pleaded for a reduction in their sentence as well as time ” to wrap up their affairs”, a request to which he acquiesced, but over the weekend they mounted a campaign against the suspension. “… all of a sudden, they got fringe characters who like the sound of their voices,” Jagdeo decried.

Sharma’s shutdown became effective on Monday at 18: 00h. The suspension of his broadcast license stemmed from a May 4, 2011 broadcast in which Anthony Vieira, during a pre- recorded programme, made remarks that could have incited inter- and intra- religious strife.

Not a personal issue President Jagdeo added that his decision to have Sharma suspended was based on a regulatory point of view. He said Sharma was not remorseful even though the independent ACB, which comprises government- appointed chairman Evan Persaud, opposition appointee R Case and private sector representative Norma McLean, had established a progression of his failure to comply with the rules of the licence. “They [the ACB] took into consideration that there were three other transgressions of a similar nature…” Channel Six’s licence was suspended for one month in 2005 for airing what was said to be false information.

In April 2008, the licence was again suspended, this time for four months for re- airing a show in which a caller threatened President Jagdeo if any of her children were hurt in the crime wave occurring at the time.

Sharma was warned by the ACB about the first broad cast, but the programme was, nevertheless, rebroadcast.

Jagdeo said that he would not tolerate the division of the nation by race or religion, which is essentially what the programme that got Sharma in hot water would have done. “Opposition should have been on my side on this matter, because we need to send strong signals to those who try to stirrup problems among our religious leaders. This country suffered too much; I thought all of them would be on my side,” said Jagdeo.

The ACB wrote Sharma, who responded with an apology to Bishop Juan Edghill, one of the persons against whom Vieira’s remarks were made.

Lacklustre opposition The president slammed the opposition for using the Sharma issue as political gambit instead of recognising the seriousness of Sharma’s violation.

Jagdeo said that it was because of the opposition’s “lacklustre” performance in mounting campaigns for elections that they are making the Sharma issue ” a freedom of the press issue”. “It is always about discrimination, corruption and anything under the sun. It is easy to say those things: you don’t have to think too much; you can get on the platform and shout them out. But when it comes down to a serious programme to take the country forward, then they find it very hard to put together that programme,” said Jagdeo.

Opposition parties such as the Alliance For Change and A Partnership for National Unity have called the suspension a strategy by the ruling party to limit their access to the media while stifling press freedom However, the president stressed: “It has nothing to do with elections. If I had done eight months it would still be the same issue.

I could have done it a few months ago. This never entered my head – this timing issue.”