Supporters call for case against Jagdeo to be thrown out

…say he always advocated for racial unity in Guyana

Supporters of former President Bharrat Jagdeo, on Monday, gathered outside of the Whim Magistrate’s Court to show solidarity with him after he was slapped with what is believed to be politically motivated charges, filed by political activist and social commentator Christopher Ram.

Armed with placards bearing “Justice for Bharrat Jagdeo”, “The matter for the case against Bharrat Jagdeo should be dismissed”, among others, the supporters showed solidarity with the former Head of State. Speaking with this newspaper, the protestors said that they will continue to stand with the Former President and believe that he should have never been brought to court to face such a matter since he is an advocate for racial unity. They are of the view, that the Former President is a “just and respectable” man who would not incite ethnic fear into the people of the country. As Jagdeo, made his way into the court compound the protesters shouted that the matter be dismissed.

An elderly woman, who was part of the protest, said she left her Black Bush Polder home since 08:30h, as she wanted to be a part of the protest action to voice her concern for the matter to be dismissed. The woman, who was brought to tears as the former President arrived, said he should not be brought to court. “I went to Babu Jaan, he was the one who talked against racism, how can they bring him to court for saying he causing racial tension …this is not right, this man is the one who fight for the betterment of Guyanese,” she stated. Lucille Ayana of Albion said during the election period opposition parties were on television uttering many racist remarks. She questioned why they were not brought to court. The protesters were assured by the former President not to worry as he will fight this to the end and will not let up until justice is served.

One of Jagdeo lawyers, Senior Counsel Bernard De Santos, had previously said that Ram, a known Government critic and holder of a British passport, “seems to have an unnatural obsession with the former President”. De Santos noted that he has examined the allegation and the section of the law under which the charge has been laid. In his view, it is frivolous, vexatious and an abuse of the process of the court in which it has been filed. He further went on to state that it is a gross misinterpretation, colossal misuse and abuse of Section 139D of the Representation of the People Act, Chap1:02.

The Senior Counsel noted that while he will not speculate in relation to the motive which inspired the institution of the charge, he will, however, state that “it constitutes an abridgement of the constitutional right and freedom of my client to speak and express himself freely”. De Santos further noted that the unprecedented use of a criminal charge to muzzle speakers at public political events was an assault on the democratic right of political leaders to speak freely on matters of national interest, as well as a violation of the democratic right of the citizenry to receive such information. He said that the case was nothing more than political sensationalisation and mischief. However, the Senior Counsel has expressed faith and confidence that the matter will be speedily reviewed by the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions.