MP Figueira ordered to pay $550,000 in costs after losing libel case against Minister Hamilton
MP Figueira ordered to pay $550,000 in costs after losing libel case against Minister Hamilton
Opposition Member of Parliament (MP) Jermaine Figueira was dealt a legal blow on Wednesday when a High Court judge dismissed his multi-million-dollar libel claim against Minister of Labour Joseph Hamilton.
In addition to having his case thrown out, Figueira was ordered to pay $550,000 in costs to the government minister.
Figueira, represented by Senior Counsel Roysdale Forde, S.C., had filed the defamation suit over statements made by Hamilton in 2021 regarding alleged financial mismanagement involving co-operative societies in Linden.
Attorney-at-law Sanjeev Datadin represented Minister Hamilton in the matter.
The libel claim stemmed from a report published by the Department of Public Information (DPI), in which Minister Hamilton stated that Figueira had received $5.7 million to launch a pig-rearing project in the Wisroc community through a co-operative society that was allegedly unregistered with the Department of Co-operatives.
The Sustainable Livelihood Entrepreneurial Development (SLED) programme facilitated the project’s execution in 2019.
Hamilton further suggested that the funds were disbursed under suspicious circumstances.
Figueira vehemently denied the claims and filed suit, seeking more than $50 million in damages from Hamilton for remarks published on January 24, 2021.
He also demanded an additional $50 million for similar statements republished through the same day on the People’s Progressive Party/Civic’s Facebook page.
The MP further named several other parties in his court documents, including the Publisher and Editor of Kaieteur News, the Editor-in-Chief of Guyana Times Inc., the Attorney General Anil Nandlall, and DPI—alleging that they republished the alleged defamatory content.
He sought no less than $50 million in damages from each.
Figueira also requested public retractions and apologies from all the defendants, along with a mandatory injunction barring them from republishing or circulating the disputed content.
He asked the court to compel the removal of online links to the articles and statements in question. His claim also included requests for aggravated and exemplary damages, interest payments, and any other relief the court deemed appropriate.
Figueira contended that the statements were intended to “besmirch, tarnish, sully, insult, and damage my good name and reputation,” accusing Hamilton of seeking political mileage.
Despite the extensive nature of the claim, the judge found insufficient merit to proceed with the case and dismissed it in full.
