Activist takes Speaker to court over refusing reply in the House

UNC activist Ravi Balgobin Maharaj has made good on his threat to take Speaker Bridgid Annisette-George to court for refusing to allow him to respond to alleged defamatory comments made against him in Parliament.

Maharaj’s lawsuit was filed on August 8, by his attorneys. Newsday understands the matter has been assigned to Justice Joan Charles.

He is represented by a team of attorneys led by Senior Counsel Anand Ramlogan, of Freedom Law Chambers.

His lawsuit contends the Speaker’s decision to blank his request to have his response to the comments on the parliamentary record was manifestly unfair and unjust.

Maharaj claimed that on April 26, Port of Spain South MP Keith Scotland, an attorney and now Minister in the Ministry of National Security, launched a “scathing and malicious attack” on Maharaj while addressing the House of Representatives.

Scotland claimed that the State had expended a little over $14 million in defending litigation from Maharaj over the health care system. He also contended that Maharaj’s lawsuit affected healthcare workers, who had to take time off their jobs to respond to his “frivolous and vexatious” claims.

Maharaj’s attorneys wrote to the Speaker in May for an opportunity to respond to the statements, but the Speaker refused his requests.

“The claimant is extremely disappointed by the unfair, irrational and arbitrary denial of his application for a right of reply.

“The false statements uttered by Mr Scotland SC in Parliament about his non-existent litigation against the regional health authorities, and the direct insinuation that he was filing these frivolous and vexatious claims which caused an unreasonable diversion of medical staff to such an extent that it caused an or contributed to the death of innocent babies.

“Since then, the claimant has been subjected to much embarrassing ridicule, public scorn and contempt,” his lawsuit contends.

“The statements to which the claimant takes objection on the basis that they are malicious falsehoods were made by Mr Scotland during the course of his contribution to the debate on the Opposition’s private motion calling on the government to improve the delivery of healthcare services to the people of Trinidad and Tobago.

“It was particularly humiliating and distressing because the debate was taking place at a time when there was great public outrage, anger and disquiet about the standard of healthcare at public hospitals which was prompted by the sudden death of several babies at the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit of the Port of Spain General Hospital.

“This debate, therefore, took place during a period of national mourning and grief for the tragic death of these innocent babies and hence the bold statements made by Mr Scotland which insinuated that the claimant was somehow contributing to the challenges and problems in the public healthcare system would have obviously struck a nerve in the public.”

The lawsuit also said Maharaj has since become fearful for his safety because of the hostility of the public against him. He also contends his constitutional rights were infringed and hopes for monetary compensation for these alleged breaches.

He wants permission to seek declarations that he was treated unfairly and an order to quash the Speaker’s decisions in May denying him the right of reply under Standing Order 18.

Maharaj will also be seeking an order for the Speaker to reconsider his request.

Also representing Maharaj are Jayanti Lutchmedial, Natasha Bisram, Kent Samlal, Aasha Ramlal and Vishaal Siewsaran.