“Nastiness” defamation case still unresolved

The legal battle between Prime Minister Gaston Browne, and Calypsonian Lena ‘Queen Ivena’ Phillip, which has been ongoing since 2017 and was triggered by her song “Nastiness,” is far from over.

The case has not yet been resolved and is still pending before the High Court.

Recently, Master Carlos Cameron Michel advised both parties to either come to a mutual understanding or proceed to trial.

The song “Nastiness” contains lyrics that allegedly defame and slander the Prime Minister, leading to the lawsuit.

The case has garnered significant media attention, and many people are anxiously waiting for its outcome.

The Prime Minister is arguing that Phillip’s 2017 calypso song, “Nastiness”, contained defamatory remarks towards him by use of “innuendos”.

He asserts that certain portions of the song insinuated “criminal corruption” and “misconduct” in public office on his part, leading him to seek damages, including aggravated damages for libel or slander for the words published and broadcast, and/or caused to be published and broadcast.

The case has been before the court since July 2017, and after seven years, Master Michel said in his March judgment that “At this stage, the parties should determine whether they wish to have the matter settled amicably, or otherwise proceed to trial to bring these proceedings to an end.”

If an amicable settlement cannot be reached, the case will go to trial where it will be determined whether the words cited by the Prime Minister are in fact defamatory.

In his latest ruling, the judge also wrote that Phillip did not have a viable argument to strike out amendments in the claim brought against her in November 2017, that specified the words and phrases used to make the alleged defamatory statements.

In addition to compensation for damages, the Prime Minister is also asking the court for an injunction restraining the calypsonian, her servants or agents, or whosoever from further publishing or causing to be published the said or similar defamatory words of and about him.

Phillip has so far denied the claims of defamation.

Prime Minister Browne has alleged that the song’s lyrics suggest that he approved the transfer of five million dollars from the Treasury to his wife’s foundation instead of the Venture Capital Fund, which was supposed to receive the money.

He claims that the song implies that the funds were misused for personal gain, and that none of the money was spent on any person or public purpose, which could be illegal or improper.

The government decided to establish a two-million-dollar Venture Capital Fund for entrepreneurs, which was later increased to five million dollars.

The announcement was made live in Parliament

Prime Minister Browne argues that this public announcement would lead listeners to interpret the lyrics of the song as saying that he acted improperly, which could constitute criminal conduct.

Browne’s lawyers claim that the song’s references to the charity run by the Prime Minister’s wife would have been known to a substantial but unquantifiable number of listeners, and they would have understood the words to bear the meanings set out.

He also denies encouraging his Members of Parliament and ministers to corruptly use their public offices for personal gain in breach of the law.

On the other hand, Phillip has argued that the words reproduced in Browne’s amended statement of claim do not represent a true reproduction of her song.

She has also denied that the song injured his character or reputation as the Prime Minister and that of his wife and family, bringing them into public scandal, odium, and contempt, including public ridicule.