BASSETERRE, St. Kitts – THE DEMOCRAT newspaper, an organ of the People’s Action Movement (PAM), was on Tuesday (Oct. 8) ordered by a High Court judge to pay Prime Minister the Rt. Hon. Dr. Denzil Douglas EC$350 000 as damages in a libel suit.
That decision was handed down on Tuesday (Oct. 8) in a written judgment by Master Perletta Lanns for The Democrat to pay Dr. Douglas $300 000 in general damages and $50 000 in aggravated damages for causing injuries to his reputation.
In December 2011, The Democrat had published an article, headlined ‘Culture of Murder’, which implied that PM Douglas had somehow been involved in the death of Noel ‘Zambo’ Heath who on Friday, October 14, 2011was shot multiple times outside his St. Johnston Village home and shortly after succumbed to his injuries at the JNF General Hospital.
Speaking with WINN FM, Jonel Powell, a member of the legal team representing The Democrat and who is also a candidate for the PAM, said that they intend to appeal the amount awarded as damages.
“Liability aside, which has already been decided upon, the quantum in a defamation matter must be awarded on the basis of the injury sustained or on the basis of the extent of the defamation if any at all…We believe that the article is not even defamatory in the first place,” WINN FM quoted him as saying.
However, even though legal counsel to the Prime Minister, Sylvester Anthony acknowledged that the cost awarded was very high, he did not agree with Powell that it was disproportionate and noted that size of it speaks to the egregious nature of the defamation.
In an interview with Freedom FM, Anthony said, “That cost award is a very high award. It tops the awards that have been given recently in this jurisdiction and in other jurisdictions. You might recall that in Nevis Michael Perkins, in his case against the Nevis Media Group, obtained damages for libel of $250 000. That was a libel in a newspaper, where there were certain allegations made. Dr. Earl Asim Martin, you might recall in another matter involving The Democrat, he got an award of, I think, $170 000.
“This case, the Court sought that in the Prime Minister’s case that the defamation was even more egregious than the others. For example, I can’t say it better that the Court did in the judgment. The Court had this to say in paragraph 30 of the judgment: ‘I find the libel of this case to be of exceptional gravity, falsely accusing someone of kidnapping, murder or conspiracy to murder is reprehensible, outlandish and outrageous. This is especially so when the person is being maligned is the Prime Minister, who is likely to seek re-election.’”
Anthony claimed that he had written to The Democrat informing them that the allegation against the Prime Minister was false and he had requested a retraction, but they neither retracted nor apologised.
He stated that when considering aggregated damages, the Court was very, very specific in its language.
“The Court looked at the fact that The Democrat never apologised, never retracted the story, never even if they were given an opportunity to do so. And the Court went on to say, in the case at Bar, even after the application to set aside the default judgment was denied, the defendants still refused to retract and apologise; thereby showing that its actions were malicious and spiteful and further injure to claimant’s proper feelings and dignity and pride. And, as a result, the Court ordered a further amount of $50 000 as aggravated damages.”
Anthony also said that The Democrat did not file a defence, and Powell told WINNFM they did not because “it was as a result of a certain set of circumstances that the defendant company was facing at that point in time”.
