THE libel case filed by Mrs. Catherine ‘Cathy’ Hughes against Vice-President Bharrat Jagdeo commenced on Friday, September 6, 2024, before Justice Priscilla Chandra-Haniff at the High Court in Georgetown.
Mrs. Hughes is the wife of well-known lawyer and Alliance For Change (AFC) leader Nigel Hughes, who is also representing her in court. Jagdeo is being defended by prominent attorney-at-law Sanjeev Datadin. The case arose from a comment made by Jagdeo during one of his weekly press conferences on November 23, 2023, in which he referred to Mrs. Hughes as a “lowlife”, among other things. She is seeking in excess of $50M in damages.

On the first day of the trial, Mrs. Hughes was the sole witness and faced extensive cross-examination. Mrs. Hughes testified that she filed the lawsuit because she found the “lowlife” comment offensive and defamatory. She asserted that she had never been referred to in such a manner by anyone else, except occasionally in Parliament. However, her assertion was challenged when Datadin presented a printout of a Facebook post from December 2023, in which Mrs. Hughes’s husband had publicly referred to her as a “lowlife.” Hughes admitted that she was indeed referred to as such by her husband on that occasion.

Mrs. Hughes initially sought to introduce a 50-second clip of the press conference in question, where Jagdeo allegedly made the “lowlife” comment. However, Datadin strongly objected, arguing that the clip was incomplete and taken out of context, as the full press conference lasted over an hour and a half and included additional remarks about Mrs. Hughes.
Datadin contended that introducing only a short clip was unfair and prejudicial, as it deprived the court of the complete context in which the comment was made. Following legal arguments, the court suggested that the full recording be admitted into evidence.

During cross-examination, Mrs. Hughes conceded that the full recording revealed Jagdeo’s comments were related to two issues: her incorrect accusation that he had given a “channel” to Venezuela and allegations that she, while serving as a minister, had awarded her company millions of dollars in contracts. Mrs. Hughes acknowledged that the “channel” issue was raised before Jagdeo’s involvement in government and that it was Dr. Barton Scotland who had raised the matter, not Jagdeo. She also admitted that her claims were based on a TikTok video that she did not have and had not introduced as evidence.

Further admissions by Mrs. Hughes revealed that, while she was a minister, she had signed cheques for her company and approved invoices sent to her ministry by her own company. Despite being aware of public commentary on her actions, she confirmed that she had not sued anyone else for similar statements. Mrs. Hughes acknowledged that Jagdeo had made similar claims but stated she would not sue him because she was aware that he had documentation to support his statements, as seen in newspapers and on social media.

She avoided giving a definitive answer when Datadin asked whether it was inappropriate or wrong for a minister to award their company millions of dollars in contracts within their ministry, responding only with, “It depends.” When questioned about Jagdeo’s comments, Mrs. Hughes admitted that the Vice-President had not mentioned her appearance, gender, or ethnicity during the press conference. The trial is set to continue on September 26, 2024, when Mrs. Hughes is expected to return to the court for further cross-examination by Datadin.

The matter is also scheduled for continuation on October 14, 2024.