WELL-KNOWN newspaper letter-writer, Robin Singh noted in his missive in the Stabroek News of Monday, January 29, 2024, that “we cannot sue judges for ignorance or overreach.”

He is absolutely right in one particular context. If you sue a judge who made a scandalous remark outside of a court room in a social setting then confusion becomes inevitable for two reasons.

One is which judge is going to preside over the trial when conflict of interest is inherent in the situation. Secondly, which lawyer is going to take your case? The citizens cannot sue judges but judges can sue citizens and this is an enormous lack of conscience in the society for allowing this.

I want to say that I will always be positive about retired judge, Justice Sandra Kurtzious for declining to hear the case in 2023 when a High Court judge sued me in 2022. If I was ever to write my memoir, I will mention this social abnormality because the multi-dimensional story of this writ makes for fascinating reading that will titillate readers. It is one of the experiences in my long praxis in Guyana that I will never forget.

I wrote a column rejecting the light sentence given a convicted murderer who invaded a home of a returning Guyanese, fired indiscriminatingly and killed the returnee. He was sentenced to time served of two years after pleading guilty.

I was upset because impact statement by the victim’s relatives was not tendered. What I am now going to write, you will not believe. I swear on my parents’ grave I did what I will write below.

I took the column to two sitting judges, three former judges and seven lawyers and they all concluded that they saw nothing libellous and were very critical of the judge for suing. Then the nightmare began. Not one lawyer agreed to defend me until a very powerfully placed Guyanese who is one of the best citizens this country produced used his influence and got a defence attorney for me. But guess what? The attorney is foreign-based and does not practise in Guyana.

I would like to thank him enormously for his help. He said he had no objection in being identified in this column. His name is Glen Hanoman. I should mention that along with Mr. Hanoman, two other lawyers drafted my defence but they asked not to be named in this article and for obvious reason.

When the case came up in the High Court, Justice Sandra Kurtzious assigned the matter to mediation under attorney, Teni Housty.

In the mediation process, the judge was present with his lawyer who was his relative and I was represented by my attorney through zoom. The judge told Mr. Housty that the controversy could have easily been settled if I had conceded to a request for an apology.

This was misleading, and I raised my voice in protest and the mediator warned me. Luckily for me I produced the letter of demand for the apology. It requested an apology and $10 million. There was no simple request for an apology. In my 35 years of media activism, my pattern is to apologize when I get these demands. I always do. I have apologized more times than I can count.

But the request came with an apology not separated from payment of $10 million.

Should a judge sue people given the enormity of the confusion that will follow? All the lawyers, except Mr. Hanoman, told me it was a risk to defend me because of the possibility of their clients being disadvantaged in future court appearances in front of that judge.

The two lawyers who assisted in shaping my defence do not want to be named because of that possibility.

The Judicial Service Commission has been installed and I plan to write it to bring to its attention the need for guidelines in relation to the question of judges suing people. It does not happen in the real world.

Judges have the power of the contempt of court avenue to confront citizens who they feel have unjustly attacked the integrity of the court.

Even if the language used by the media is libellous or scandalous, judges have resorted to the contempt of court avenue. But they should never sue. The spectacle in court can damage the credibility of the judiciary.

Imagine in a trial what happens to a judge in the witness box. A skilled lawyer can damage his reputation. It will then be awkward for him to return to the bench to preside on libel cases. I will ask the Judicial Service Commission for its position. A judge suing the media could be interpreted as intimidation.