–Plaintiff points to Granger, Ramjattan when asked about APNU+AFC’s refusal to leave office after 2018, alleged Russian interference in 2020 elections
–admits her claims against Jagdeo stemmed from a 14-second clip of full press conference on TikTok

CATHERINE ‘Cathy’ Hughes faced a rigorous cross-examination in her defamation case against Vice-President Bharrat Jagdeo over his alleged “low life” comment, with questions focusing on the A Partnership for National Unity + Alliance for Change (APNU+AFC)’s refusal to leave office after being toppled by a no-confidence motion in 2018, and concerns about alleged Russian interference in the 2020 elections.

The trial continued on Monday before Justice Priscilla Chandra-Hanif at the High Court in Demerara. Hughes, a prominent member of the opposition party, AFC, initiated legal action against Vice-President Jagdeo following comments during one of his weekly press conferences on November 23, 2023, in which he allegedly referred to her as a “low life”.

During Monday’s session, Hughes faced a series of questions aimed at further testing her credibility.
For instance, she was questioned by Jagdeo’s attorney Sanjeev Datadin concerning a statement she made at a press conference regarding the 2020 general and regional elections.
In that statement, Datadin said that Hughes had asserted that Russians were in Guyana to “hijack the elections”. When asked if she had made the statement, Hughes responded, “Those were not my exact words”.

A recording of Hughes making the statement was played by Jagdeo during his November 23, 2023 press conference. In court, the portion of Jagdeo playing the recording at the press conference was presented.
Hughes then admitted that she had received information about four individuals, including two Russians, who were staying at a prominent hotel, and were in possession of questionable surveillance equipment.
She said that these individuals were in the country without proper authorisation. When Datadin asked if anyone had been deported, she responded, “I think it was four”.

Asked by Datadin whether these individuals were Russians or if they held Russian passports, she responded: “I can’t answer that question. I think it is best directed to the Minister of Security at that time [Khemraj Ramjattan].”
Datadin suggested that during a press conference, Hughes expressed concerns that certain individuals possessed equipment capable of interfering with the 2020 elections. Jagdeo’s lawyer pointed out that voting in Guyana is conducted with paper ballots and pencils, emphasising the improbability of election interference through electronic means.

During the cross-examination, Hughes was questioned about the APNU+AFC government’s refusal to leave office and call elections after being toppled by a no-confidence motion in December 2018.
Asked why the APNU+AFC remained in office after the passage of the motion, Hughes responded that she could not speak for the government at the time, and that “the President” could answer that question. The President of Guyana at that time was David Granger.

On the first day of the defamation trial on Friday, September 6, 2024, Mrs. Hughes was the sole witness and faced extensive cross-examination.
Under cross-examination, Hughes admitted that Jagdeo’s “low life” comment was related to two issues: Her accusation that Jagdeo had granted a “channel” to Venezuela, and allegations that her company, Videomega, had received millions of dollars in contracts while she served as a minister under the APNU+AFC government.

In October 2015, while Jagdeo served as Opposition Leader, he responded to questions from the media corps on the border controversy, where he recalled that “there were other options that involved a negotiated settlement; a negotiated settlement which did not see any land concession– that the 1899 award would remain intact– but there was one view that you could, probably on the maritime area, give Venezuela a channel out to the sea.”
The APNU+AFC coalition government had then taken the statement and reduced it to a 14-second clip, with the words: “… you could probably on the maritime area, give Venezuela a channel out to the sea.”

She admitted she was aware that the channel issue with Venezuela had been raised before Jagdeo’s involvement in government.
She also conceded that Jagdeo had no role in government in 1989, and that it was former Speaker of the National Assembly Dr. Barton Scotland who’d initially raised the issue of the “channel” and not Jagdeo.
On Monday, after being pressed about the source, she admitted that her only basis for the claim was a 14-second TikTok video.

Additionally, she said that Jagdeo’s assertion that she had given millions of dollars in contracts to her company was true “to some extent”.
Despite being aware of public commentary about her actions, she confirmed that she had not sued anyone else for similar statements.

The claimant acknowledged that Jagdeo had made similar claims, but stated she did 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, Hughes admitted that the Vice-President had not mentioned her appearance, gender, or ethnicity during the press conference.

She is expected to face further cross-examination, as well as re-examination on November 1, 2024. Another trial hearing is also set for November 28, 2024.