JavaScript is disabled in your web browser or browser is too old to support JavaScript. Today almost all web pages contain JavaScript, a scripting programming language that runs on visitor's web browser. It makes web pages functional for specific purposes and if disabled for some reason, the content or the functionality of the web page can be limited or unavailable.

Monday, May 5, 2025

Cops building sedition case over Tobago rant

Raid on Sat’s station

by

Peter Christopher
2208 days ago
20190418
Sat Maharaj

Sat Maharaj

A po­lice raid on the com­pound of ra­dio and TV Jaagri­ti has been la­belled an at­tack on re­li­gion by Sec­re­tary Gen­er­al of the Sanatan Dhar­ma Ma­ha Sab­ha Sat Ma­haraj.

Nine po­lice of­fi­cers vis­it­ed the sta­tion with a war­rant un­der sec­tion 13 of the Sedi­tion Act re­quest­ing record­ings from April 16.

The ac­tion came days af­ter a clip of Ma­haraj mak­ing dis­parag­ing com­ments about To­bag­o­ni­ans dur­ing a show on the sta­tion went vi­ral on so­cial me­dia. In the clip, Ma­haraj de­scribed To­bag­o­ni­ans as lazy per­sons who were more in­ter­est­ed in crab and goat rac­ing than work­ing and tar­get­ing white women on beach­es to rob and rape them.

The clip was wide­ly con­demned by var­i­ous sec­tors of the so­ci­ety, Prime Min­is­ter Dr Kei­th Row­ley and Unit­ed Na­tion­al Con­gress leader Kam­la Per­sad-Bisses­sar.

The Telecom­mu­ni­ca­tions Au­thor­i­ty of Trinidad and To­ba­go sub­se­quent­ly stat­ed that Ma­haraj’s con­tentious com­ments con­sti­tut­ed a breach of Clause D9 of the con­ces­sion grant­ed to his Tu­na­puna-based com­pa­ny Cen­tral Broad­cast­ing Ser­vices Ltd (CB­SL) in a let­ter on Wednes­day.

But Ma­haraj’s lawyers fired back to this with a let­ter of their own, say­ing they planned to ap­proach the High Court to file an in­junc­tion to re­strain the au­thor­i­ty from tak­ing any fur­ther ac­tion against the sta­tion and call­ing on the au­thor­i­ty to re­spond in writ­ing.

Ma­haraj took to TV Jaagri­ti yes­ter­day af­ter­noon to re­spond to TATT and the raid, flanked by his lawyers Ste­fan Ramkissoon and Di­nesh Ram­bal­ly.

“The on­ly re­sponse we got was an in­va­sion of the stu­dios of ra­dio and TV Jaagri­ti, rather than a re­sponse to the lawyers by let­ter. So I re­gard this, this is not on­ly an in­va­sion on the rights of the peo­ple, this is an in­va­sion on my right to re­li­gion be­cause this is a re­li­gious sta­tion,” Ma­haraj said.

In a re­lease on the is­sue, the TTPS con­firmed that of­fi­cers of the Spe­cial In­ves­ti­ga­tions Unit, led by In­spec­tor Wayne Stan­ley, went to the sta­tion’s Pasea Main Road, Tu­na­puna of­fice “with the ob­jec­tive of ver­i­fy­ing the au­then­tic­i­ty of the clip and to ob­tain a copy of the record­ing, for fur­ther in­ves­ti­ga­tions.”

The re­lease said the of­fi­cers met and spoke with two of­fi­cials and “a search war­rant for ev­i­dence un­der Sec­tion 13 of the Sedi­tion Act, Chap­ter 11:04, was shown to them.”

The po­lice said a mas­ter copy of an au­dio-vi­su­al record­ing was sub­se­quent­ly hand­ed over to in­ves­ti­ga­tors. How­ev­er, Ram­bal­ly and Ramkissoon claimed po­lice re­fused to give a copy of the war­rant to the staff when they ar­rived on the com­pound yes­ter­day. An of­fi­cer in­volved in the raid, speak­ing on cam­era with a Jaagri­ti em­ploy­ee, said he would not do so un­less giv­en le­gal ad­vice con­cern­ing the re­quest.

Con­tact­ed yes­ter­day, TATT’s ex­ec­u­tive of­fi­cer of Cor­po­rate Com­mu­ni­ca­tions and Ad­min­is­tra­tion, Sher­ry McMil­lan, con­firmed the au­thor­i­ty had con­tact­ed Jaagri­ti’s lawyers yes­ter­day and con­firmed they had on­ly is­sued a first warn­ing and no oth­er ac­tion was re­quired by ei­ther par­ty. She said if an­oth­er breach oc­curred, on­ly then TATT would be prompt­ed to take fur­ther ac­tion. McMil­lan al­so said TATT did not re­quest that the po­lice vis­it Ra­dio Jaagri­ti and that they on­ly learnt of the raid af­ter it oc­curred.

In a let­ter yes­ter­day, TATT act­ing CEO Cyn­thia Red­dock-Downes al­so con­firmed that the au­thor­i­ty was tak­ing no fur­ther sanc­tion against Ma­haraj’s sta­tion re­gard­ing a pos­si­ble breach of Con­ces­sion Clause D9. Red­dock-Downes added that TATT “does not in­tend to pre­vent or, in any way in­ter­fere with your client’s pro­grammes from air­ing on any of the TV and ra­dio sta­tions which it cur­rent­ly utilis­es or from pre­vent­ing your client from pro­duc­ing or host­ing the pro­gramme “Ma­ha Sab­ha Strikes Back.”

How­ev­er, Red­dock-Downes made it clear the au­thor­i­ty re­serves the right to fur­ther sanc­tion the sta­tion should the breach re­oc­cur and urged Ma­haraj to pay due re­gard to the oblig­a­tions of the con­ces­sion the sta­tion was grant­ed and the con­di­tions in the Draft Broad­cast­ing Code.

But Ma­haraj said should TATT or the po­lice con­tin­ue to pur­sue ac­tion against Jaagri­ti, he would take the fight all the way to Privy Coun­cil.

“I want to as­sure the Hin­du com­mu­ni­ty, this will be a hell of a le­gal fight. This is why we didn’t join the CCJ and we pre­fer the Privy Coun­cil in Lon­don. We have con­fi­dence in our le­gal sys­tem. We have con­fi­dence in our judges and Ap­peal Court judges and if we are wrong, let them pro­nounce. I don’t want any politi­cian to tell me I am wrong. Let the courts de­cide,” Ma­haraj said.


Related articles

Sponsored

Weather

PORT OF SPAIN WEATHER

Sponsored