-Mohammeds probe was mentioned by person escorting him
Minister of Natural Resources Vickram Bharrat could not be questioned in the United States by federal agents or any other authority as he travels with diplomatic immunity and the case of the sanctioned Mohameds was only mentioned by one of the persons escorting him through JFK Airport in New York, his attorney Sanjeev Datadin says.
“There was a comment made about it [the Mohameds case] by one of the persons but it had nothing to do with him [Bharrat]… it was not a question. He was not required to answer…,” Datadin told the Sunday Stabroek yesterday when contacted.
“He could not be held or questioned by federal agents because that would have been in contravention of the Geneva Convention [on the privileges and immunities of the United Nations]. He travels on a diplomatic passport,” he added.
The mentioning of the Mohameds – Nazar and Azruddin – who have been sanctioned by Washington under the Global Magnitsky Act for gold smuggling will be seen as odd if purely protocolary functions were being undertaken by the person in question.
Following a video being shared on social media and other internet platforms which shows Bharrat walking through JFK with two persons on either side of him and a uniformed Customs and Border Patrol (CBP) officer behind them, questions were asked about whether they were federal agents.
Datadin said yesterday that the men who accompanied Bharrat “were not Federal Agents” and pointed out that protocol officers can be anyone assigned to carry out protocol duties by the respective agency responsible. “It is not performed by one special person. Whomever is available… a police officer, CPB agent”, he said.
On Friday, Bharrat told Stabroek News that the United States assisted on Thursday in expediting his clearance at the JFK airport in New York where he was rushing to be with his father who had a medical emergency.
He dismissed suggestions that he was on Thursday evening, met by, escorted off and questioned, by US federal agents. He said that the post on veteran journalist, Enrico Woolford’s page, was “mischievous” as he “came in as an emergency.”
“No. It was courtesies being extended to expedite clearing. I was not detained or interrogated,” Bharrat told Stabroek News from the United States.
On Friday evening, Bharrat retained Datadin’s services and sent Woolford a lawyer’s letter telling him that his allegation and insinuation was “utterly false and without merit.”
“Your libelous publication was maliciously posted to deliberately cause damage to my client’s reputation and character. I am instructed to inform you that your statement is defamatory and has caused injury to my client’s reputation and good character.”
Bharrat is seeking a “clear, unqualified and unconditional apology and retraction in a form, manner and terms to be agreed on or before the 14th July, 2024 at 2 pm.”
He stated that he also wants “substantial compensation and reasonable legal costs” and asked Woolford to contact his lawyers and make a proposal.
Woolford yesterday told this newspaper that his attorneys Eusi Anderson and Nigel Hughes, are currently addressing the matter and a statement will be issued, but he stands by his words.
