Attorney-at-law Selwyn Pieters has denied any part in the deactivation of the “Team Mohamed” Facebook page, challenging Opposition Leader Azruddin Mohamed to publish whatever evidence he relies on to say otherwise.

In a statement issued Tuesday, Pieters said he had no role, “directly or indirectly,” in the page’s deactivation. He called any claim that he caused or requested it false and said none has been backed with evidence.

Pieters said Mohamed has given several different explanations for the page’s temporary unavailability.

He said Mohamed first blamed the Guyana Police Force after being detained over allegations relating to an unlicensed fast boat and the absence of a valid captain’s licence.

Mohamed then pointed to the People’s Progressive Party, and later said Meta, the owner and operator of Facebook, had deactivated the page over alleged copyright infringement.

“He has now sought to attribute responsibility to me. This I reject out of hand,” Pieters said.

Pieters noted that Mohamed has said his page was restored after his attorneys engaged Meta.

He argued that those lawyers should be able to disclose any response from Meta explaining the deactivation or suspension, and he called on Mohamed to release it “so that the facts can speak for themselves.”

Pieters said he wished to address, “for completeness,” a separate issue that should not be conflated with the page’s deactivation.

On Saturday, October 3, he said, he saw a post by Mohamed about a Customs Anti-Narcotic Unit (CANU) operation that referred to President Dr Mohamed Irfaan Ali.

He also read a CANU press release issued that afternoon. In his professional judgement, he said, the post was defamatory and went beyond legitimate political criticism or public commentary.

He said he acted independently, as the attorney authorised to represent the President on social media matters. Around 5:50 p.m. that day, he said, he called Mohamed on his cellphone and asked him to remove the post. Mohamed referred him to his attorney, Siand Dhurjon.

Pieters said he spoke with Dhurjon around 6:45 p.m. and formally communicated that the post was defamatory and should be removed, failing which he would pursue the remedies available to his client.

According to Pieters, Dhurjon said he would raise the matter with Mohamed but could not guarantee the request would be honoured.

The post stayed up. Pieters said the longer defamatory material remains online, the greater the harm to his client. When he last reviewed the page, he said, the post had 1.8K likes, 218 comments and 618 shares.

Having given notice and a chance to resolve the matter, Pieters said he then used his authority as counsel for the President to submit the post to Meta under its applicable processes and policies.

“Meta independently considered the submission and took whatever action it deemed appropriate based on its own assessment. I did not determine Meta’s decision, nor did I have the power to do so,” he said.

Pieters stressed that his action on a specific publication was entirely separate from the earlier deactivation of the Team Mohamed page.

He also rejected any suggestion of political motive.

“My actions were not political, nor were they undertaken at the direction of a political party,” he said.

He described them as taken in his professional capacity, based on his assessment of the publication and the authority given to him to protect his client’s legal interests.

Pieters acknowledged that freedom of expression and freedom of the press are fundamental rights that must be protected, but said they do not place anyone beyond the law, including the law of defamation.

“Where I determine, in the proper exercise of my professional judgement, that my client’s legal rights have been infringed, I am entitled and professionally obligated to pursue the lawful remedies available to him,” he said.