Media company Central Broadcasting Services has lost its lawsuit over the decision of an elderly Justice of the Peace (JP) with dementia to grant a search warrant to police officers, who were investigating former Sanatan Dharma Maha Sabha (SDMS) secretary-general Satnarayan Maharaj for sedition.
Delivering a judgment, last week, High Court Judge Eleanor Donaldson-Honeywell dismissed the case against JP Ackbar Khan brought by the company, which operates Radio and TV Jaagriti.
In the case, the company claimed that the police presented insufficient evidence to Khan before he granted the search warrant.
It also questioned Khan’s mental state at the time he made the decision as State attorneys admitted that he was subsequently diagnosed with dementia when they applied for Khan’s daughter to represent him in the lawsuit.
Justice Donaldson-Honeywell ruled that although Khan could not testify in the case, she was able to determine that the warrant was properly issued based on the evidence of the investigators, who applied for it.
“The Defendant has proven that reasonable cause existed in the evidence before him to believe the crime of sedition had been committed,” she said.
Dealing with Khan’s mental health capacity, she noted that doctors only suspected that he was suffering from dementia during a routine examination well over a year after the warrant was granted in April 2019.
“There is no evidence of irregularity in the actions of the Defendant or proof that he lacked the mental capacity for decision making at the time of granting the search warrant,” she said.
The company was ordered to pay Khan’s legal costs for defending the case.
The investigation into Maharaj stemmed from a series of statements on his Maha Sabha Strikes Back programme on TV Jaagriti on April 15, 2019.
Maharaj claimed that citizens living in Tobago are lazy and labelled the men as rapists.
Before filing the case, the company had to successfully sue the T&T Police Service (TTPS) to disclose the warrant.
While no criminal charges were eventually brought against him or the company, Maharaj filed a separate lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the Sedition Act before he passed away later that year.
Maharaj’s son Vijay was allowed to continue the case, which was upheld by High Court Judge Frank Seepersad.
His judgement was subsequently overturned by the Court of Appeal and the United Kingdom-based Privy Council.
However, the latter did provide guidance on how the law should be properly interpreted and applied.
The company was represented by Jagdeo Singh, Dinesh Rambally, Kiel Taklalsingh, Stefan Ramkissoon.
Khan was represented by Fyard Hosein, SC, Vanessa Gopaul, and Vincent Jardine.
