Campbell files ‘fair comment’ defence against defamation lawsuit

General secretary of the Opposition People’s National Party (PNP) Dr Dayton Campbell has denied the claims filed in a defamation lawsuit by Cabinet Minister Daryl Vaz, calling his utterances on a political platform “fair comment”.

Campbell’s defence was filed by attorney-at-law Shena Stubbs-Gibson in the Supreme Court on December 27, four months after the suit was filed against him.

“I am very confident of Dr Campbell’s position. I am very confident that he has a sound defence to the claims raised by Vaz, [James] Robertson and [Othneil] Lawrence. We are anxious and raring to have the matter adjudicated before the court where we will explore all defences to their claim,” Stubbs-Gibson told The Gleaner yesterday.

Vaz, the minister of science, energy, telecommunications, and transportation, accused Campbell of character assassination after he addressed supporters at the PNP’s Clarendon North Western annual conference last July.

“The deliberate and intended effect of the defendant’s words was to lower the claimant in the estimation of right-thinking members of society, to humiliate the claimant and expose him to ridicule, contempt and mockery while asserting that the defendant ‘no ‘fraid a nobody’,” a claim filed in the Civil Divison of the Supreme Court last August outlined.

While at the political meeting, Campbell mentioned a 2015 murder-plot rumour that was started by a Jamaica Labour Party (JLP) supporter who was subsequently sentenced to 30 months in prison for creating public mischief.

He is facing two more lawsuits from Robertson, the member of parliament (MP) for St Thomas Western and Lawrence, a former member of parliament for St Ann North Western, as a result of the statement.

Media reports

However, Campbell, also a former MP for St Ann North Western, has argued that his comment was not novel and was the subject of several media reports in 2015, which his team intends to rely on during trial.

“The words published amount to fair comment on a matter of public interest,” Campbell said in the defence filed.

“The words published by the defendant were a matter of public interest and for the benefit of the public and as such is subject to qualified privilege.”

Further, he denied that he implicated Vaz in any wrongdoing in a second statement made by him during the political meeting.

Vaz, who represents the Portland Western constituency in the House of Representatives for the governing JLP, has argued that Campbell, through his utterances, sought to sustain a rumour operatives of the PNP began some 40 years ago as part of a smear campaign against him.

“At no time, whether by implication or otherwise, did the defendant call the claimant’s name or any of the other two men in connection with the moment of silence requested…,” the defence filed stated.

“If and insofar as, the words complained of were defamatory, as alleged, or bear any of the defamatory meanings attributed therein, the defendant contends that words published… were published on an occasion of qualified privilege.”

He denied that his comments were motivated by malice as outlined in the claim filed by Vaz and challenged the minister to prove that he caused serious injury to his person, feelings and reputation and that he suffered considerable embarrassment, anxiety and distress.

Campbell further insisted that he did not intend to and neither did he receive any political advantage because of his comments at the PNP meeting in his argument against aggravated and exemplary damages.

Vaz is seeking damages for defamation; exemplary and aggravated damages; interest; an injunction barring Campbell from repeating the allegations; costs and “such further and/or other relief” the court deems just.

kimone.francis@gleanerjm.com