By Prior Beharry
SECTIONS 3 and 4 of the Sedition Act of Trinidad and Tobago meet objectives to be deemed valid law.
This was the ruling of the Court of Appeal on Friday as it set aside this aspect of Justice Frank Seepersad’s judgment delivered on January 13, 2020.
The Appeal Court comprising Justices of Appeal Mark Mohammed, Charmaine and Maria Wilson ruled that Sections 3 and 4 of the Sedition Act do not violate the principle of legal certainty.
The court stated that they meet the objectives required to be deemed valid law in that they:
- provide fair notice to citizens of the prohibited conduct;
- are not vague;
- define the criminal offence with sufficient clarity that ordinary persons (with appropriate legal advice if necessary, and having regard to precedent) can understand what conduct is prohibited; and
- are not couched in a manner that would allow law enforcement officials to use subjective moral or value judgments as the basis for their enforcement.
The Appeal Court ruled that Justice Seepersad “was not plainly wrong to order” that Vijay Maharaj be substituted in the legal proceedings for his late father Satnarayan Maharaj.
The case was brought after Satnarayan Maharaj, a Hindu rights leader, cultural activist and media personality, made certain comments in a programme.
Maharaj was the founder and managing director of Central Broadcasting Services Limited (CBSL) which operates Radio Jaagriti.
He hosted a bi-weekly call-in show called The Maha Sabha Strikes Back on Radio Jaagriti.
In April 2019, during that programme, Maharaj allegedly made certain statements which were viewed by the Telecommunications Authority of Trinidad and Tobago ( TATT) as “divisive and inciteful,” the Court of Appeal stated in its ruling.
TATT issued a warning to CBSL on April 17, 2019.
A transcript of what Maharaj said was quoted in the judgement.
It stated:
And now let’s get down to Tobago ah little bit and what’s happening there. Nothing going correct in Tobago. They lazy, six out ah ten of them working for the Tobago House of Assembly, getting money from Port of Spain.
They doh want wok and when they get a job. They go half pass nine and ten o’ clock they go for tea, breakfast.
The rest of them abled bodied men they doh wah no wok ah tall. Run Crab Race, run Goat Race and go on the beach hunting for white meat. Yuh see ah white girl dey. They rape she, they take away all she camera and everything. This record inno.
This is what Tobago is all about but anything they want, they going to get. So now we have a lot of ferries ahready.
Our Prime Minister is renting a ferry to take Tobagonians from Scarborough bring them to Port-of-Spain so they could buy market in Port of Spain market.
They ain’t growing nothing dey, they coming to make market inno. From Tobago we paying for them to come and pay (make) market.
And you know how much our Prime Minister paying our money? Every day two hundred and sixty three thousand five hundred and eighty dollars a day.
For this boat to bring them lazy people from Scarborough to come and make market in Port-of-Spain and take them back. They wouldn’t grow nothing they. They wouldn’t grow nothing, when they ketch they crab is to run race and when they mind they goat, is to run race. They come in Port-of-Spain, growing nothing. We paying, we the tax payers in Trinidad, we paying. Whatever Tobago wants, Tobago gets and I am saying, we should they change the name of this country?
We are no longer Trinidad and Tobago, we are Tobago and Trinidad.
We are subservient to them, right. And this big mouth man, rasta man called Attorney General Fitzgerald Hinds, when people make statements, he like to chastise them, insult them. A lady made a statement. Hadad said the government mix messaging of the situation in Tobago was not helping the sea bridge because the government was giving different messages.
The response of Fitzgerald Hinds is that, ‘if the woman normal.’ Once you disagree with them, you are not normal. Once you point out the truth you are not normal. Well I say Hinds go and spend time seeing about your hair because it take you two days to plait them. The woman is normal and I believe she is more normal than you. That is why the fella in Sea Lots kick water on you, right.
The police issued two warrants on Radio Jagriti, located at Pasea in Tunapuna, on April 18, 2019 and June 13, 2019.
The Court of Appeal stated, “By the time the second warrant was executed on June 13 2019, it was determined that the statements in question were made on April 9 2019. The second warrant yielded audio and video recordings of the statements imputed to SM (Satnarayan Maharaj). Investigations continued.”
The court stated, “Because of the ongoing investigations, SM presumed that the police officers held the view that either he or CBSL committed an offence under the Sedition Act and they intended to initiate criminal charges against him.
“He was concerned about the possibility of being criminally charged, prosecuted and sanctioned for ‘exercising his right to freedom of expression and to conduct himself as a media practitioner.’ On May 31, 2019, SM and CBSL filed a constitutional motion challenging certain provisions of the Sedition Act, namely, sections 3, 4 and 13…”
CSP advertisement
In a release shortly after the judgement Attorney General Faris Al-Rawi said the Appeal Court’s ruling upheld the substantive position preserving the saved law principles and the constitutionality of the Sedition Act, Chap. 11:04 and reversing the trial judge, Mr Justice Frank Seepersad’s decision in which he struck down the Sedition Act as unconstitutional.”
He said, The Court of Appeal held that the act:
- provides sufficient and clear notice to citizens of the prohibited conduct; and
- contains adequate safeguards against abuse of power. This matter has significant ramifications in relation to all other challenges that may be brought on saved law.
Justice Seepersad had ruled: “The Court declares that sections 3 and 4 of the Sedition Act infringe the right of the individual to enjoy freedom of thought and expression, the right to join political parties and express political views and the right to freedom of the press which are all rights which are tenets of a sovereign democratic state and individually or collectively these provisions infringe the binding declaration recorded at Section 1 of the Constitution.”
Al Rawi said, “This matter has significant ramifications in relation to all other challenges that may be brought on saved law.”
He added that the Sedition Act, Chap. 11:04, was constitutionally valid and remained the law of T&T.
The claimants – Maharaj and CBSL – were represented by Ramesh Lawrence Maharaj SC, Jagdeo Singh, Dinesh Rambally, Kiel Taklalsingh, and Stefan Ramkissoon instructed by Rhea Khan.
While the Attorney General was represented by Fyard Hosein, SC, Vanessa Gopaul, K. Madhosingh, A Romain, Sean Julien instructed by Vincent Jardine.
The claimants have indicated their intention to appeal to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council.
See related stories below:
