PEP's Alexander responds to legal threat

PROGRESSIVE Empowerment Party (PEP) political leader Phillip Edward Alexander has responded to the threat of legal action by businessman Ricky Raghunanan and has called for his own apology.

Alexander’s attorney Matthew Gayle on Thursday wrote to Raghunanan’s attorney Kashif Gibson of the CJ Williams and Co law firm.

On Tuesday, Gibson called on Alexander to immediately remove defamatory statements he made against Raghunanan in a Facebook live broadcast earlier this month. A second pre-action protocol letter was sent the next day.

Gibson’s letter to Alexander also called on him to retract the statements and offer compensation and an apology, both online and published in the daily newspapers.

Gayle, in his response on behalf of Alexander, complained of a “wholly arbitrary and unrealistic deadline for response.”

He also complained about Gibson’s pre-action letter being published in the press and reported on TTT before he received it by e-mail.

Gayle told Gibson it suggested that his client was not minded to engage in meaningful settlement discussions, but instead suggested an intention to scandalise and sensationalise the businessman’s angst with Alexander.

The attorney accused Gibson of using “highly inflammatory” allegations which had no basis in any of the facts the attorney outlined in the letter.

This, he said, led to the “irresistible conclusion that your client sought only to sensationalise this matter to garner public interest.”

Gayle also said it was “an inexcusable overstep” for Gibson to allege that Alexander “abused the right to freedom of speech’ and to allege that the PEP leader was “spewing” defamatory comments.

“I am therefore calling on you to immediately withdraw the unsubstantiated and baseless opinion that my client is somehow acting to promote his ‘selfish ambitions’ and offer a suitable apology on terms agreeable to my client,” Gayle wrote.

He also told the attorney the pre-action letter failed to set out the proper context of the alleged defamatory words and “also fails to make the bare claim that the words complained of are not in fact a true statement.”

Alexander, on June 9, in a Facebook live video was accused of speaking of Raghunanan and the supply of stage and tents for election campaigns. He also mentioned the two main political parties and their leaders.

Gayle told Gibson it appeared his second pre-action protocol letter served “little purpose other than to attempt to ‘grandcharge’ my client into submission. It is an unfortunate use of pre action correspondence.”

Gayle said Alexander intended to rely on every defence available to him, including, but not limited to, truth and/or fair comment, and/or qualified privilege, and/or absolute privilege, and/or public interest immunity.

He also called on Raghunanan by 12 pm on June 22 to give Alexander no less than 28 days to respond to the pre-action protocol letter and to correct the deficiencies he pointed out.