THE exigency of the Trinidad based Newspaper, Trinidad Express, to qualify, in its editorial dated the November 1, 2014, under the caption, “Perilous times for Guyana free press” a biased disposition which in its entirety does not address the crux of the issue at hand, is indeed, quite perplexing. I was with great trepidation, that I read the editorial emanating from the Trinidad Express, that was used by some local media outlets in Guyana as the precipice of justification for the unethical/ illegal transgressions by the Kaieteur News and its Publisher, to make available and public in a manipulated form, a recorded/wiretapped private conversation between a senior reporter of Kaieteur News and the Attorney General of Guyana.
Not once, did the Trinidad Express in its editorial, which conveyed the impression that the Government of Guyana is not supportive of free and independent press, and even went further to suggest that the government of Guyana was somehow linked to the 2006 murder of the Kaieteur News pressmen. Not once, did the Trinidad Express address the elephant in the room.
That elephant, is the highly unethical and presumably illegal subversion of the privacy of the Attorney General by releasing without his consent, a recording/tape of a private conversation,not an interview, that he had no knowledge was being tapped. Beyond that, is the fact that the published recording/tape which was attributed to the Attorney General was in its entirety, tampered, manipulated and contextualized to the benefit of Kaieteur News.
I am perplexed, as to how and why, the editorial did not see it necessary to address this issue,it would mean that they are not au fait with issue at hand or they choose to neglect that aspect entirely. If the latter is the case, should one then interpret the stance taken by the Trinidad Express to mean that, they too subscribe to the illegal invasion of one’s privacy.
Indeed, in the editorial by the Trinidad Express it was stated that, “Kaieteur News took the extraordinary step of releasing the recording of a private conversation between a Kaieteur News reporter and the Guyana Attorney General.”
That “extraordinary step” is indicative of a newspaper lacking the ethical foundation of journalism, a newspaper that prides itself in the demoralization of public and private officials and a newspaper steeped in journalism intended to promote sensationalism.
Is the Trinidad Express certain that was the conversation which actually took place? My understanding is that the Attorney General has since the publication of the recording, filed legal proceedings against Kaieteur News, with the intent to determine the legality and authenticity of the recording as well as the liabilities, if any. He has also expressed optimism that a proper forensic analysis will be conducted by the Guyana Police Force, who are also investigating the matter, since the recording was presented to the Police by publisher of Kaieteur News.
The International Libel & Privacy Handbook, a Global Reference for Journalists, Publishers, Webmasters, and Lawyers, the second edition, which has contributions from professionals from over 24 developed countries have posited that News outfits should not “confuse the Right to Publish with what’s Right to Publish.”
In the preface of the book it was outlined that, “common sense and good taste will almost never steer you wrong… a reporter’s job is not to gratuitously inflict damage. Nor is it to be ‘hard-hitting.’ It is to “see truth and report it.” In order to do that, the truth has to be contextualized, and presented in a fair manner. The fact that some detail may be true is not always by itself an ethical justification for publishing it. The more sensitive the fact, the closer reporters and editors must look at whether the public truly needs to know that fact…asking these questions helps guide us to a more ethical outcome that also serves the public interest.”
Page 15 of the same book, addressed the issue of recording tapes and broadcasting those tapes without the permission of the person being recorded, where it said, “even in areas where it is permissible for reporters to tape-record their telephone interviews without the other person’s consent, that is not a guarantee that such tapes may be broadcast without consent. The act of making the tape is separate from disclosing the tape (or its contents), which might be a violation under statutory privacy laws, or broadcasting regulations.”
In the case of Guyana, the interception of Communications Act, Chapter 47:03, outlines who are the persons vested with the power to intercept communications and the consequences for entities or persons that do so illegally. The Constitution of Guyana, in addition to international covenants such as the United Nations (UN) Universal Declaration on human rights clearly outlines the entrenched provisions for the protection of one’s privacy.
In fact, Article 12 of the UN International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights says, “no one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honour and reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of law against such interference or attacks.”
It is granted, that an editorial is an opinionated piece but, the necessity for fairness and balance is paramount within the context of journalism.
It is also unquestionably obvious, that the kind of journalism the Kaieteur News subscribes to is devoid of any fairness or balance. Within the course of one year, 50 lawsuits have been filed against this newspaper, and it is internationally recognized that the Kaieteur News is the most sued news outlet in the world. Is this not an indication of the type of journalism being practiced by this news outfit?
Witnessing, the stance taken by the Trinidad Express in its editorial outlined above, I would like to posit a few questions.Would the publisher of the Trinidad Express use its paper as a personal tool to exact revenge, and pervert the court of justice, if he was charged for defrauding the government in taxes? Would the publisher of the Trinidad Express use the paper to attack public figures, simply because they are discharging their duties? Would the Publisher of the Express, tape a private conversation of a Government Minister without his consent or knowledge, knowing the act to be illegal, immoral and unethical and publicly release the recording, knowing also, that the contents could be damaging to the honour and reputation of the person?
If it is indeed, a position where the Trinidad Express would not engage in such unprofessional acts, then why would they attribute support to such? If it is that the Trinidad Express does not know the sullied disposition of the Kaieteur News, then it should refrain from pronouncing on issues that it does not fully understand.

Yours sincerely,
Faruk Mohamed