THE governing People’s Progressive Party/Civic (PPP/C), in a statement yesterday, registered its “deep concern” on the gag ordered against the Guyana Times newspaper, issued by a High Court judge.

The statement, a reiteration of sentiments expressed by Attorney General Anil Nandlall, said:“We support the Attorney General’s contention that the order of the learned Judge may be an abuse of press freedom and is in violation of the Constitution of Guyana…as a party that has fought so many battles and contributed to so many advances in the pursuit of freedom of the press, we view this as a most retrograde step.”
The ruling party called for the decision to be reversed.
It said:”We may not agree with many of what the press publishes, but we must respect their right to publish it, once it is lawful for them to do so.”
Previously, in October 2013, the Guyana Times carried a series of articles about the annual returns of a public company, Guyana Stores Limited (GSL) and its shareholders and directors, as these were felt to be of public importance.
The statement said the newspaper was advised that the issues reported on concerned pending litigation before the High Court and the reports are, therefore, inappropriate.
After the ruling was made, the AG stated that it was in collision with freedom of expression and freedom of the press which is a right guaranteed by the Constitution.
Respectful view
He continued:“In the circumstances, I am of the respectful view that the learned judge fell into error by issuing the said gag order. It is my view that the information which the newspaper was prohibited from publishing, are, indeed, matters of public interest. It involves public funds. The disclosures are from public records. Even the trial itself, is a public hearing under Article 144 (9) of the Constitution of Guyana.”
The court case was initiated by the Government against the majority shareholder of GSL, Royal Investments Inc. and is being heard before Justice Roxanne George-Wiltshire.
The lawsuit was instituted by Government some eight years ago, claiming US$2M and interest, allegedly owed after the privatisation of the company for US$6M.
The PPP/C maintained that what was published by the Guyana Times relates to the proceeds from a sale of a state asset, Guyana Stores Ltd, making the funds public funds, hence the public interest in the story.
According to the PPP/C :“From its inception, the PPP/C has been in the forefront of every form of struggle to ensure that Guyanese from all races, creed and class enjoy the universally recognised basic human rights, freedom from exploitation of every kind, access to justice and, indeed, a better quality of life.
“In particular, we have a long history of championing freedom of expression in all its forms, including, freedom of the press….newspapers, television outfits, radio stations and news agencies operate freely and without any form of undue and unlawful censorship or interference from the Government.
“In fact, it is well known that many of their publications are scathingly critical of the Government, some scandalous, libelous, and even malicious. But they continue to operate without pressure from the Government.”
The trial at the centre of the controversy started in late 2010, but saw a one-year break in court. After some progress in the matter, there was a two-year break. The matter comes up again for hearing on December 2 and 5.