By RICARDO WELLS
Tribune Staff Reporter
rwells@tribunemedia.net
FOREIGN Affairs and Immigration Minister Fred Mitchell has hinted at possible legal repercussions for comments levelled at him by Free National Movement Leader Dr Minnis earlier this week, dismissing the claims that he was “giving out citizenships” as “damnable and contemptible falsehood and untruth”.
Mr Mitchell, continuing the war of words started by claims he made while on the campaign trail Saturday, warned Dr Minnis that in many cases of libel and defamation, claimants have at least six years to pursue a legal case if they deem it necessary.
Dr Minnis, in a post to his Facebook page Monday, insisted “desperation” had set in for the PLP, specifically taking Mr Mitchell to task over his indication that if those 3,500 civil servants hired under the Christie administration wanted to be made permanent and pensionable they would be wise to vote PLP.
Dr Minnis continued his attack on Mr Mitchell, accusing the Cabinet minister directly of hawking jobs for votes and “naturalising foreigners left and right in recent days, so that they can immediately make their way to register to vote”.
Dr Minnis also suggested that the “jobs and training” programme referred to by Mr Mitchell was also being used in service of the party’s campaign.
In response Tuesday, Mr Mitchell called Dr Minnis’ claims “libelous and defamatory”.
He added: “I have six years to bring an action in defamation. Time is therefore longer than rope.”
Mr Mitchell continued: “I hope when his silly season is over that he is able to learn the difference between facts and fictions, fair comment and defamation. There are costs associated with it.”
Clarifying his initial remarks made over the weekend, Mr Mitchell said his comments were made as statements of policy, not personal “invective” directed to the FNM leader.
Mr Mitchell said Dr Minnis’ actions over the last few days were structured in a way to cast doubt on the PLP’s actions, all while continuing to avoid publicly addressing issues of national importance.
To that end, Mr Mitchell implored Dr Minnis to give definitive answers on whether his party would fire the 3,500 workers who were in the process, he said, of being made permanent.
“Would the FNM fire those in the empowerment programme?
“These are all policies of the PLP to protect public sector jobs. What is their programme for jobs? He has no answers just personal attacks. The PLP believes in jobs for our people and protecting our country and its workers. I pledge to continue to work for the workers of the country,” he added.
Mr Mitchell has long held the opinion that an elected FNM administration will only represent the interests of former Baha Mar developer Sarkis Izmirlian and Lyford Cay billionaire Louis Bacon.
Mr Mitchell has suggested that these “special interests” go against what is best for The Bahamas.
Comments
DDK 7 years, 7 months ago
Looks like the heat is getting to some people!
Sickened 7 years, 7 months ago
How many people has he threatened with libel and how many has he actually gone after in the courts? Needless to say his batting average is not so good!
banker 7 years, 7 months ago
And yet when they brought a certain character to court for posting some words on Facebook 2 years ago, the police and RBDF were wearing flack jackets, bulletproof vests and carrying ArmaLite AR15 military assault weapons.
TheMadHatter 7 years, 7 months ago
So they believe in jobs just before election. Three months ago? Last year? Too many international trips to go on, i guess.
sheeprunner12 7 years, 7 months ago
May 10 ........... Sinking of the HMBS Flamingo ................... Sinking of the SS PLP .................. Talk dat Fweddy!!!!!!
banker 7 years, 7 months ago
Cuba is going to sink us again.
John 7 years, 7 months ago
The only thing the PLP needs to do now is investigate who among its ranks is benefiting from crime and who among the police force may be aiding and abetting criminals. With over 1,100 murders under the same police administration it is time to start with investigating officers who stand over victims dead bodies and claim the person was a prolific offender, or 'he was wearing an ankle bracelet when he was killed' or' he has been recently released from prison'. These statements give reason that the persons making the statements have motives for murder. If even unconsciously so. And beyond that they show prejudice towards the victims of murder and, by their own actions, demonstrate they do not intend or do not have the moral capacity to investigate the victims' murder without prejudice. And based on that premise, the perpetrator of the crime may go unpunished and so the police may be an accessory after the fact. The job of the police is to investigate a crime, preserve the crime scene,collect evidence and to present that evidence to the court, should the perpetrator of the crime be apprehended. Their duty is not to pass judgment on victims of murder or any other crime for that matter. and thereby prejudice the public against them. Upvote0
sheeprunner12 7 years, 7 months ago
Very good observation ............ Greenslade has been a disaster as COP
Sign in to comment
OpenID