The Alliance for Change’s (AFC) Cathy Hughes, in the High Court, admitted that she falsely claimed that General Secretary of the People’s Progressive Party (PPP) and Vice President, Bharrat Jagdeo, as president offered a “channel” to Venezuela to settle the border controversy.
She acknowledged that the channel issue with Venezuela had been brought up before Jagdeo’s government involvement. She also admitted that Jagdeo had no role in government in 1989 and that Dr Barton Scotland, not Jagdeo, initially raised the “channel” issue.
Hughes also admitted that her only basis for the claim was a TikTok video, which she did not have and could not submit to the Court as evidence.
Jagdeo, during his weekly news conference at Freedom House, Robb Street, Georgetown, on Thursday noted her admissions. He charged that he was pleased that Hughes had taken the matter to court since the “dishonesty” of politicians like Hughes was being exposed for the public to see.
“It is dishonourable behaviour…now, I am glad in fact that they (Nigel Hughes and Cathy Hughes) sued me…she lied on me to the people in Linden, knowingly. And she admitted that in Court…we are looking forward to additional material being presented in Court,” he said.
MISREPRESENTATION
As Opposition Leader, Jagdeo, in October 2015, while responding to questions from the media on the border controversy, had explained that in the past, before the PPP/C took office in 1992, several options were discussed as part of reaching a negotiated settlement with Venezuela to resolve the border controversy.
He had said, “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.”
A clip was extracted by the then APNU+AFC Coalition Government that reduced Jagdeo’s comment to: “…you could probably on the maritime area, give Venezuela a channel out to the sea.”
On this basis, the AFC, and others, peddled the lie that Jagdeo offered a maritime channel to Venezuela as a means of settling the border controversy with Venezuela.
NOVEMBER 2023 EXCHNAGE
This was the case when Hughes, during a public meeting in Linden, Region 10, in November 2023, stated that as President, Jagdeo, offered Venezuela a “maritime channel” to Venezuela – although by 2023, the truth of the matter was clear.
The fact was that considerations about an offer of a maritime channel were done under a PNCR Administration, not under any of the successive PPP/C Administrations.
Speaking during a news conference on November 23, 2023, at the Office of the President, Jagdeo had condemned comments made by Hughes. Jagdeo underscored the dangers of her lie, referring to page 88 of Venezuela’s submission to the International Court of Justice (ICJ), where it claimed that: “Guyana presented proposals for a practical settlement that included the transfer of important potions of territory southeast of Punta Playa.”
He had said then, “This is the rumour-mongering among people because they hate the PPP or maybe me, so much, that they are prepared to compromise even our border.”
According to him, at a national, the Parliamentary Opposition, and Government levels have one united position, but at other venues, a select few seem bent on undermining this position.
Jagdeo had blasted Hughes referring to her behaviour as “low-life” behaviour. On this basis, she filed a libel claim against him.
Hearings in the libel claim filed by Hughes began on September 6, 2024, before Justice P. Chandra-Haniff at the High Court in Georgetown. [DPI]
