Barbados Underground (BU) welcomes the Barbados Today report about the George Payne v Edmund Hinkson: Storm Clouds Hovering Over MAM court matter even though it has come several days after we posted. The fact that Roy Morris (Chief Editor) and shareholders in the Barbados Today have chosen to expose one side; that of the plaintiff, and not the defendant is evidence of the stain which the traditional media continues to blot the media landscape of Barbados. BU is aware how matters before the Courts must be treated in the public domain. Given its public profile a media house can easily be joined by either side to a matter like this one. What it does not mean however is that ALL the facts should not be reported. In this case why not ensure that the Statement of Defence (SOD) is included in the report?
BU continues to find this matter intriguing but not for the reasons political yardfowls on either side will show glee. There are the political ramifications of the court action by Payne for the Barbados Labour Party (BLP). Also, it gives BU the opportunity to explore a related issue associated with libel and slander which are now interchangeably referred to as defamation under the Act.
As we understand it, when we had the legal difference in Barbados between libel (written) and slander (spoken) libel was always actionable without proof of damage. On the other hand with slander one had to prove damage except in a few instances, one of which was imputing criminal offense. As far as BU is concerned the Payne v Hinkson matter falls into the category of slander actionable. Based on the Barbados Today report it is also alleged that the allegations were published which brings libel into play (no details available). The legal people will see this as a moot point because the distinction between libel and slander have been removed in the Defamation Act.
Why are we making a big deal of the distinction?
In cases where damages were awarded based on slander the quantum of the damages was dependent on the number of persons who became party to the slanderous statement. Invariably the awards were quite small. Libel to compare is published and obviously reaches many people which has the greater potential for larger awards. The legal eagles would described libel as something to be viewed as perpetual in this context.
A critique of the Defamation Act may force some interested spectators to ask the eminent jurist Sir David Simmons, who had oversight at the time, why craft the legislation that would ‘limit’ pay outs by media houses if libel was eventually proved?
The political dimension to this matter is equally as intriguing.
If Alair Sheperd QC was man enough to apologize for skinning his botsy at a female Judge, why not newbie Edmund Hinkson as a member of a BLP party looking to chart a new path behind the second coming of MAM? Seem simple enough a matter to arbitrate, after all these are public figures who represent our government in waiting.
Obviously there is some political strategy playing out deep in the bowels of the Barbados Labour Party which will make for interesting theatre in the weeks to come. Has Hinkson agreed to be the rabbit to force Arthur’s hand much sooner than planned? As Payne sued to counter the Hinkson move? Has MAM decided once and for all to facilitate the bloodletting at this early stage to accrue time later for healing to take place? If the Hinkson move has forced Payne to move sooner than plan it may mean MAM has the upper hand or has she? What will be the response to Hinkson’s behaviour? How influential are the elders in the BLP party? Will MAM be blamed given her legacy as leader to date? Will the hammer fall on the man of many hats whose legacy in parliament is likely to be recorded in invisible ink? What about Payne’s sidekick Dale Marshall and Sutherland who appears to be someone being mentored by Payne. Is there an opportunity for the crossing of the floor?
Bottomline, whether Payne or Hinkson wins there is heavy collateral damage which the BLP Battleship is likely to take on. Will MAM call it quits? Will another leader emerge? Why are we not discussing these issues given the importance of a strong Opposition in our system of government? We all saw what a decimated Opposition caused by the ruckus between Mascoll and Thompson did to the Democratic Labour Party. At a time when BU and others have been asking the political parties to foster a esprit de corps we have this BS.
We look forward to the Hinkson view filed on this matter.
BU’s Confidential Feedback Box
The blogmaster invites you to join and add value to the discussion.