Attorney General and Minister of Legal Affairs, Anil Nandlall has filed a more than $100M lawsuit against senior PNCR member James Bond and former APNU+AFC minister Jaipaul Sharma over what he said are libelous statements they made against him in relation to allegations over state land matters.
Nandlall (the claimant) said that the statements in question which Sharma and Bond (the defendants) made against him were published on their respective Facebook pages on November 17th.
In his statement of claim, Nandlall is hoping that the court would order both defendants to publish “suitable” corrections and apologies on their Facebook accounts within seven days of the date of the court’s order as well as the court’s judgment “including the court’s declaration of falsity.”
In addition, he wants the court to grant permanent injunctions restraining them, whether by themselves, representatives, and agents or otherwise; from publishing or causing to be published the posts or similar defamatory words and to also order them to remove the posts from Facebook and anywhere else it may be published.
The Attorney General (AG) is suing Bond and Sharma individually for damages in excess of $25M for each of the alleged libelous statements they are accused of having made; in excess of $25M each for special damages and in excess of $25M each for aggravated damages.
Nandlall is also seeking court costs and any other order the court may deem just to grant.
The AG says that the publications have the potential to sully his reputation, standing and integrity especially given Facebook’s reach.
He complains through his battery of attorneys led by Devindra Kissoon, that government is reviewing certain transactions in relation to state lands undertaken under the previous APNU+AFC government and that Bond has been implicated in a “material” way in those transactions which he said “are currently the subject of criminal investigations by the police.”
Nandlall said that regarding the posts Sharma made against him, he personally called the former government minister who confirmed that he had indeed made the post.
He said that through his attorneys, he then wrote Sharma requesting a retraction and apology for what he said was the libelous, malicious and completely false publication, as it was causing damage to his office, standing and reputation. According to Nandlall neither an apology nor retraction has been forthcoming but rather even more libelous statements.
He said that on the heels of the publications made by Sharma, Bond then himself followed with several alleged libelous publications as well.
Nandlall argues that at no time was he or his private law firm ever engaged in the dealings alleged by the defendants regarding the state lands in question.
In the circumstances, he is hoping to be granted the reliefs sought by the court.
