Advancing claims of bias, former Attorney General Basil Williams wants High Court judge Priya Sewnarine-Beharry to recuse herself from hearing a libel action his successor Anil Nandlall SC had filed against him.
Williams’ application has its genesis in the action filed by Nandlall on April 4th, 2017, for damages for libel and slander which he alleges Williams published against him at a press conference.
Nandlall’s complaint is that Williams had said at that press conference that he (Nandlall) would be charged for missing law books, unaccounted for during his (Nandlall’s) tenure as Attorney General between 2011 and 2015.
With Nandlall having been subsequently charged, however, Williams in defence denied that he had libeled or slandered the now-AG, while stating that he at the time of making the statements spoke in his capacity of attorney general; and as custodian of state assets had a duty to give transparent answers on his stewardship.
About three weeks after Williams’ statement— on April 27th, 2017, Nandlall had been criminally charged and placed before the Magistrate’s Court with the offence of larceny by bailee over a number of missing law books.
Williams said that the libel action came up for hearing before Justice Sewnarine-Beharry on a number of occasions and that the judge on December 5th, 2019 ordered a halt to the trial until the completion of the criminal proceedings against Nandlall.
According to Williams, the judge had said that should the criminal charges be dismissed, then the libel suit will be sustained and conversely if Nandlall was convicted, then the libel suit will be dismissed.
Williams argues, however, that the staying of the trial until the completion of the criminal proceedings raises the likelihood of bias on the part of the judge and also a pre-determination of the issues raised by Nandlall in his statement of claim.
The former AG goes on to argue that staying the matter for the reasons given “conveys that Justice Beharry attaches greater importance to the outcome of the charge rather than that the charge itself confirmed” Nandlall’s contention that Williams said he would be charged.
Williams said that the laying of the criminal charge against Nandlall established his defence of truth and fair comment on a matter of public interest.
Williams notes the criminal charges against Nandlall being discontinued on October 16th, 2020 upon the directions of the Director of Public Prosecution (DPP), but said that during the pendency of the libel action “there has been a great disparity in the award of costs” by Justice Sewnarine-Beharry against him as compared with awards against Nandlall which he said again raises the appearance of bias.
