THE defamation case filed by Mrs. Catherine ‘Cathy’ Hughes against Vice President Dr Bharrat Jagdeo was on Thursday last adjourned to Monday, October 14, 2024, at 10:00 hours by Justice Priscilla Chandra-Hanif at the High Court in Georgetown.

The trial was scheduled for continuation on Thursday last but had to be adjourned as Jagdeo’s lawyer, Sanjeev Datadin, was involved in a separate trial before another judge.
Mrs. Hughes (the claimant) is the wife of well-known lawyer and Alliance For Change (AFC) leader Nigel Hughes, who is also representing her in court. 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, September 6, 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.

Jagdeo’s attorney asked Mrs. Hughes, “Has Nigel Hughes refereed to you as lowlife?” to which she replied, “No.” He then inquired whether her husband had a Facebook page and if he posted a picture of her on November 29, 2023. Mrs. Hughes responded, “I do know.”

Datadin then asked the claimant if her husband had captioned the photo, “When I grow up, I want to be a lowlife or marry one.” Mrs. Hughes confirmed, “Yes, he did,” and explained that the picture featured about five people, including herself, and was taken on a yacht. He asked her, “No one doctored your pics?” and she responded, “Not that I am aware of.” When Datadin inquired if she could identify the other people on the yacht, Mrs. Hughes said, “I can, but I prefer not to.”

Datadin then asked if her husband’s Facebook post, “When I grow up, I want to be a lowlife or marry one,” was referring to her. She responded, “Yes, I would think but you can ask him.”
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 former Speaker of the National Assembly 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 under the previous A Partnership for National Unity + Alliance For Change (APNU+AFC) government, she had signed cheques for her company, Videomega and approved invoices sent to her ministry by her company. She testified: “When I was minister, I removed myself from the day-to-day running of it. For more than 25 years, [Videomega] provided services to all ministries in Guyana, including production for the same defendant [Jagdeo]… the video on his Competitiveness Strategy. When I relinquished the management of Videomega…I subsequently came to know that some of the contracts and clients and government clients that Videomega previously had for two decades, some of those clients still approached us to do work because I was not part of the day-to-day management.”

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, responding with “I cannot answer yes or no because in certain circumstances it would be appropriate.”

She went on to state that Jagdeo’s assertion that she had given millions of dollars in contracts to her company was true “to a certain extent” and “not completely in my opinion.”
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.

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 October 14, 2024, when Mrs. Hughes is expected to return to the court for further cross-examination by Datadin.