Local newspaper to boycott Legislative Assembly
(CNS): Following the vote in the country’s parliament on Thursday to ask the attorney general to prosecute a local newspaper and its reporter, the paper’s boss has said it will boycott the proceedings. Brian Uzzell, the publisher of The Caymanian Compass, has said not only is he standing by his reporter, Brent Fuller, but none of the paper’s team of reporters will be attending the Legislative Assembly until the threat of prosecution is lifted. The vote to take legal action against the country’s oldest newspaper comes in the wake of objections by elected officials to an article and an editorial on an FOI review subcommittee meeting behind closed doors.
In an article published in today’s edition of the Compass (Monday 13 December), Uzzell stated: “It is a dark day for the Cayman Islands when legislators decide to prosecute responsible media because they disagree with their opinion. What transpired in the Legislative Assembly on Thursday should embarrass and frighten the people of this country.”
Following a ‘reprimand’ of the reporter and the paper by the speaker of the LA and the suspension of Fuller’s so-called “reporting privileges” for the rest of the week, Ezzard Miller tabled a motion to request the AG to prosecute under the Immunities, Powers and Privileges Law, which he believed the two pieces had breached.
During her address the speaker had said it was time for her to act “when the free press … begins whittling away at the root of democracy … defaming the integrity of the country’s Legislative Assembly”, a comment the Compass publisher found ironic. “I remember when Mrs Lawrence was involved in putting out a weekly newspaper that was harshly critical of the integrity of certain members of Legislative Assembly,” he said.
Lawrence had also indicated that reporting on the Legislative Assembly was a privilege that was awarded by her office and which could be revoked by her office, a point Uzzell opposed. “In a free society, to report on what happens in Parliament is a right of the people who elect the representatives and who pay their salaries,” he said. “We don’t see our role as one of privilege, but one of service to this community. We use considerable resources to provide this service, but I won’t have my staff ridiculed and threatened by politicians and a five-times frustrated politician just because they don’t like our opinion or a factual article we’ve written.”
The paper’s boss said it appeared Lawrence seemed intent on making the job of reporting on the Legislative Assembly more and more difficult. “First she cancelled all press passes of journalists and insisted they file annual register of interest forms, even though the requirement isn’t supported by Standing Orders,” he said. “Then she took away journalists’ right to use a Legislative Assembly parking spot next to the Library. Now this.”
The speaker has also revoked the permission given to reporters to use laptops, given by Linford Pierson during his time as speaker, and has banned reporters from having their mobile phones switched on while in the LA.
As a result of Thursday’s incident, Uzzell said he would no longer send reporters to attend the Legislative Assembly. “Not under the current circumstances and climate,” he added.
Category: Local News
Take a read of the Compass editorial today. Desmond is back in the form of BrIan Uzzel. What a shameful and disrespectful editorial. Two wrongs don’t make a right.
The legislators have taken the extreme action of recommending the criminal prosecution of the Compass and one of its reporters. It’s only natural Brian Uzzell would fight back.
While I didn’t have a lot of respect for Demond, I always appreciated his fighting spirit. I for one am glad to see Brian Uzzell exhibit a little of that spirit.
As for today’s Compass editorial, it seems fair comment to me. Respect has to be earned, something the legislators don’t seem to understand.
Yep, definately appears we have a new Desmond in the making..Such a shame to see a good quality newspaper go down this road. I just hope that Brian can stop and take stock and stop this "pissing war" that no one will win. CaymanNetNews is basically nonexistent now and I cetainly would not want to see the Compass go that way even if it will in essence open up the possibility for more competition in the newspaper business should the Compass fail.
Defend your actions and move on but to threaten and engage the parliament "to bring it on" seems like two school children that can’t get along rather than two professional bodies.
In the spirit of Christmas, someone needs to take the bull by the horns and stop this situation from deteriorating more than it has.
The Compass, sanctioning itself by refusing to go back into the Legislative Assembly does nothing to help them sell newspapers or win their cause unless they are going to make it up which is in essence what they are already accused of doing and plays right into the hands of the legislators who have accused them of the same thing.
The legislators pursuing sanctioning the Compass does nothing to help them because they would then be excluding the media and when there is no media there is no transparency or correct reporting which would give fodder to the Compass to further their side.
No one wins! Let’s see who has the balls to to the right thing.
Fair commentary
A more moderate editorial stance, even in the face of extreme provocation, does the newspaper more good in the long run and does not alineate the neutral readers who depend on it for reliable news.
The United Kingdom is definitely keeping a sharper eye on the Cayman Islands now; the financial dictates laid down to Cayman’s Finance Minister is proof of that.
These Cayman legislators have their work cut out for them to meet the reporting deadlines for the Government financial statements to satisfy the UK’s borrowing standards and should be focusing on that and the protection of Cayman’s citizens from the criminals that are now running rampant in the country.
Taking affront to innocous reporting and threatening reporters with futile actions only make them look petty and stupid.
I rather think the Privy Council in London loves taking Cayman’s money and awarding it to those who these bullying members of the Legislative Assembly and CI Government have wronged and they never seem to learn.
Pity is, its the poor Caymanian people who pick up the tab every time.
The last attack on freedom of the press cost the Cayman Islands almost CI$ 12 million.
Have these imbeciles in the Legislative Assembly so quickly forgotten this ?
Climate change is going to cause the sea level to rise up to 15 feet in the next 100 years! Soon there wont be anymore island, legislative assembly, or governmental corruption to worry about! Live for the moment & appreciate what you’ve been blessed with…
Democracy is Alive and Well in the Cayman Islands
If you think that Freedom of the Press or Freedom of Speech does not exist in the Cayman Islands, you might choose to live somewhere where such privileges are censored or restricted, like any Arab nation, or even closer to home, Cuba.
The rules and protocols of Parliamentary procedure exist for a reason: to maintain order, to ensure fairness, and to keep Members honest. The Legislative Assembly (Immunities, Powers and Privileges) Law also applies to the Press. Brent Fuller is aware of the rules of Parliamentary privilege and his obligation to comply with those rules. Of course, every benefit comes with a responsibility. The privilege to report on the proceedings of Parliament comes with the responsibility to carry out that task with accuracy and a high measure of professional etiquette.
In the original article written by Mr. Fuller, it is my opinion that the reporter intended to mislead the reader by using a sensational headline ("Secret FOI Review Set"), and by suggesting in the body of the article that the procedure for setting up a committee to review the Freedom of Information Law was somehow unfair or corrupt, or shrouded in secrecy and away from public scrutiny. The Committee appointed to review the FOI Law was appointed by all of the Members of the Legislative Assembly. Where is the unfairness in that? It is understandable that all fifteen members of the Legislative Assembly cannot be active participants in the review process (it is impractical), and that they might appoint certain Members to be in charge of the process and to report back to the larger legislative body with its findings/updates. This is called bi-partisanship and it is the ultimate success story of any democratic process.
Freedom of Information is a very important subject and one in which we all have a vested interest. It is essential to a democracy. For the reporter to suggest that the process for review, which was already enshrined in law and approved by Members, was somehow secret or undemocratic, in my opinion, was intended to raise doubts about the integrity of the Members and the fairness and transparency of the process. I agree with the action taken by the Speaker.
It says more to me that the Caymanian Compass cannot admit that they over-reached in their reporting. The headline and article was obviously intended to generate readership and intended to capitalize on a certain emotional discontent in the Cayman population. The reporter and the editor obviously did not anticipate being held accountable. This is the beauty of free speech. You see, free speech doesn’t mean being able to say whatever you want, whenever you want. Free speech is as much a responsibility as it is a freedom.
If I were the Caymanian Compass newspaper I would man-up and make the apology. The people of the Cayman Islands will get their news from somewhere. (Again, the beauty of Freedom of the Press.) Walking out of a debate is no debate at all.
Notably, in a true demonstration of how a democracy works, the motion to prosecute Brent Fuller was brought by an independent Member. It was passed by nine votes to four. The four opposing Members included the Premier and one of the leaders of the opposition. No Member condoned or agreed with Mr. Fuller’s actions. Those Members who disagreed felt that the Speaker’s reprimand was sufficient. Again, the fact that the editor of the Caymanian Compass would give himself an ultimatum (that the newspaper and the reporter will not apologize under any circumstance) says more to me about how detached the press core is from the real needs and issues affecting the people of the Cayman Islands.
Democracy in the Cayman Islands is alive and well. And this instance is proof of it.
This is a well-reasoned response and does have some technically correct points but the real issue here goes beyond technicality to the ‘essence’ of the matter.
A relevant question to be answered is this; had this debate and question been about any other issue than the Freedom of Information law, would the response of the Speaker and Legislative Assembly been so shrill and drastic ?
In the context of a UDP Government led by McKeeva Bush, who’s very own FOI Commissioner has made public that the Ministry of Finance, of which he is the head, has violated the FOI laws, could this ‘secret committee’ be trusted come back with a fair decision on this law ?
The fact that the opposition PPM was a part of this committee leaves no reason for public trust in the integrity of the process, given their conspiracy with the UDP on so many recent laws passed and non-opposition in areas in which there should be, to maintain democracy and integrity.
Everyone in Cayman knows the resistance of the political culture to the FOI law and if Brent Fuller’s article was meant to remind the reading public of this and was factually accurate, then he has done his job.
All this is political posturing by both parties politicians to their ignorant and guillable supporters.
The Cayman Islands dare not arrest and prosecute Brent Fuller or there will be hell to pay from both the United Kingdom and the United States and McKeeva Bush well knows this.
He was smart enough to not vote for such a silly, spiteful motion that he knows has absolutely no chance of ever being carried out.
This previous contribution is a clear example of how you can spin anything to mean anything that you want.
Isn’t it ironic that the meeting of politicians to discuss the freedom of information law was not going to be held in public?
And when the word secret was used politicians found this to be worthy of great discussion and finally voted to prosecute the newspaper for this outrage.
To think that politicians don’t know that regardless of the outcome of this situation a clear message has been sent to the news media does not strengthen the reporting of news in Cayman.
Another irony…that this happened after the new constitution was enacted.
Where I come from freedom of the press is a right not a privilege.
Well written!
What was even more disturbing were the nature of Mr. Uzzell’s comments afterwards which expressedpersonal contempt for the MLAs and the Speaker. Folks, I do not agree with our elected members about many things and I definitely support FOI. However, we should not let that blind us to the fact our institutions must be respected even by journalists. The ‘boycott’ of the LA proceedings will not of course displease the MLAs. It would have worked in the days when the Compass was the only news medium but those days are long gone.
Respect is to be EARNED whether on a personal or institutional level. And because other countries are even more controlling of the press, and anti- freedom of thought, doesn’t make Cayman a poster child for free speech.
Respect is earned by all, private and publicsector. But even more so with the public sector because we elect these people into positions of power and authority to lead our country. We also pay them handsomely till death do us part. Many voters feel that the world and local economic situation, the deficit, entitled civil service, tourism, health and most importantly the crime situation is being mismanaged by our leaders and just out of their depth to turn around. When I stop hearing and seeing daily violent crime reports, stop hearing that we cannot control our spending and civil service, start seeing the financial and tourism industries turn around, start seeing elected members turn down tax payer perks that are ridiculous and stop seeing the elected members getting wealthier and wealthier while in office they will start to earn some respect back.
It is obviously nonsense to suggest that the country’s foundational institutions must "earn" your individual respect. That is a philosophy that can only promote anarchy and lawlessness as each resident can then become a law unto himself claiming that the legislature has not earned his respect and he therefore does not have to observe the laws that it passes. Individuals may have to earn your respect but institutions such as the legislature and the courts, and the offices they represent, most certainly do not. You OWE them respect as part of the social contract.
This is not about the individuals and it is not about suppressing freedom of speech or the press. Let me illustrate the point with what most would regard as a great democracy with constitutionally enshrined freedom of speeach. In September, 2009 U.S. President Barack Obama addressed both Houses of the U.S. Congress on the health care bill. In response to his denial that health care legislation would provide free coverage for illegal immigrants Republican Rep. Joe Wilson shouted, "You lie!". Most everyone was shocked and appalled. Under pressure from his own party Wilson called the White House the shortly thereafter to apologise and issued the following statement:
"This evening I let my emotions get the best of me when listening to the President’s remarks regarding the coverage of illegal immigrants in the health care bill," he said. "While I disagree with the President’s statement, my comments were inappropriate and regrettable. I extend sincere apologies to the President for this lack of civility."
Regarding the incident Vice President Joe Biden said "I was embarrassed for the chamber and a Congress I love. IT DEMEANED THE INSTITUTION (my emphasis)."
House Minority Whip Eric Cantor (Republican) said "I know that Congressman Wilson has issued an apology and made his thoughts known to the White House, which was the appropriate thing to do".
It was not that the Republican leadership agreed with the President’s comments, like his policies or indeed even like him personally. Indeed it appears that the President’s denial was inaccurate. The point was that they recognised that respect is due to that office particularly within the precincts of the Houses of Congress. However, the way it was dealt with defused the situation. Wilson issued a prompt apology and the U.S. President accepted it saying "we all make mistakes". There was neither the heavy-handed approach of the motion to prosecute nor the arrogant refusal to apologise.
Now please don’t miss the point and say that the MLAs are not the President of the United States or that you respect President Obama as a person. It is the principle of the matter which I hope you have now grasped.
Catch phrases should not take the place of serious thought and unfortunately that is precisely what it did in your case.
There are just a few points in this post I would like to address.
1) If Cayman does indeed enjoy freedom of speech to the extent suggested by your opening comments, maybe you could explain why you post as "Anonymous" or why I, like most on here, don’t use my real name?
2) Whatever Mr. Fuller’s intentions when he wrote the article, the issue which is at the heart of the concerns of the public is not how the sub-committee was constituted, but the decision that it’s meetings should be private. Your focus on procedural form and not substance mirrors Mr. Miller’s own defence on this site, with, in my opinion, equal lack of merit. Have you actually heard any MLA explain why they should be private? I don’t believe I have.
3) You are right when you say there is a level of emotional discontent in Cayman. I’d be interested to know how you think holding the meetings to discuss the FOI in private in any way alleviates this discontent? You seem to be a big believer in democracy, so surely you recognise that if anything, keeping such deliberations private when both the words of certain MLA’s and the actions of various non-complying government departments indicate that FOI has hardly been welcomed with open arms, should be challenged?
4) Of course democracy is alive and well here. It was alive and well when the AG refused to do anything about the clear breach of the election law by 2 successful BT candidates. It was alive and well when the Premier sought to appropriate legal aid funds to his ministry and had to be stopped by the Governor. It was alive and well when the government sought by various means to by-pass the Central Tenders Committee on the port development and recently negotiated loan facility. It was alive and well when the entire opposition walked out of the LA in November, because of course we pay them to do this. It is still alive and well every time government uses emergency powers to by-pass the 21 day rule for considering new legislation.
That the only thing MLA’s can agree on in a by-partisan manner is asking the AG to prosecute a journalist and his newspaper at a time when the world’s press is highly sensitive to any challenge to it’s freedom deserves all the scorn being poured in their direction, yet you consider it a stroke of democratic genius. Brilliant!
Dear O’Really:
Thank you for your reply to my post. I believe I can answer most of the questions that you have raised; however, it is not my intention to go point for point with you. Everyone is entitled to their opinion. That applies equally to all posts on this site.
1. If there was no Freedom of Speech in Cayman, we wouldn’t be allowed this conversation. The fact that I (and most people on this site) are able to post as "Anonymous" is evidence of that freedom. There are very few places on the internet (as in, news commentary) where you can still post as Anonymous. The reason why I posted as Anonymous is because most people on this site post as Anonymous, or use a screen name, as you have done. If I used a name in my post, that would probably be a distraction from the debate. You should note thatI did not use the freedom of my Anonymous post to attack anyone or deride anyone. I think I was clear in stating that I was simply expressing my opinion.
2. Mr. Fuller’s intentions when he wrote the article, and the newspaper’s intentions when they published the article, are entirely relevant. If it was the article’s intention to raise awareness, that could have been done, in my opinion, in a more constructive way, with a more responsible choice of words. The article on the other hand, chose a headline and words that suggest fear and secrecy to make its point. This, in my opinion, is a more sinister and misleading intention than simply raising awareness and providing objective reporting to the readership.
3. As I understand it, the proceedings of the Committee are not secret, which is why I did not address the point more specifically. The Committee was appointed by all of the Members of the Legislative Assembly. This required bi-partisan agreement. The Committee will hear the testimony of those who present evidence before it, including, the FOI Commissioner. On this point, the FOI Commissioner cannot be a member of the Committee, because she is not an elected Member of Parliament. The Committee is a select committee of elected Members. Also, for the FOI Commissioner to sit on the Committee would, in my opinion, be a matter of conflict. It would be, in my opinion, like having one person serve as the prosecutor and judge on the same case. The FOI Commissioner is appointed to fairly review, represent and put forward requests for information from the public. She cannot, in my opinion, serve as the judiciary over the process in which she participates and leads. She can, and will, present her proposals for reform to the Select Committee and those proposals will be tabled and recorded (made public). The FOI Commissioner, no doubt, is fully briefed on the process for presenting her proposals and any avenues for follow-up/further submissions.
4. The reason why no MLA has spoken to the point of why the meetings are to be secret is because the meetings will not be secret. MLAs have have said that. The process to appoint members to the Select Committee was democratic and fair and within the rule of law. Here are some quotes from a recent article posted on this site (http://centos6-httpd22-php56-mysql55.installer.magneticone.com/o_belozerov/31115drupal622/foi/2010/12/07/no-gag-order-foi-sub-committee-meetings):
Thanks for the response.
Just out of curiosity, did you expect any politician ( or anyone associated with the sub-committee hearings for that matter ) to come out and say " I’m happy that the hearings will be in camera because you never know what will come up and which of us might say something we may later regret should the public find out; this way we have an opportunity to edit the official minutes and put a positive spin on everything for Joe Public?"
I live in Cayman and you in Utopia apparently.
If the other media houses (CNS included) support the Compass and boycott their proceedings, that will teach them a lesson, but it is the people who will suffer loss. The news houses should boycott the marketing or photo ops put on by the persons who voted for the boycott. Name them, shame them and hold them to account by boycotting them, until they apologise publicly.
Smart Alec
Agreed, go to the LA as usual and continue reporting the facts we need to know and any investigative reporting (which we could do with some more of like NBCs nightline), but boycott their press releases about how good they think they have done etc…
There is much talk here about disrespecting the honorable The honorable system.
I would suggest that reporting the decisions of our elected officials is not doing that. Rather, that our elected officials should consider whether they, through their actions are doing the disrespecting!
Th people should follow the lead of the press and stand up to the wrongs of government
This is absurd. What is so important about reviewing a law that it needs to be done in a non public setting? It’s not like they were discussing trade secrets, or something that put us at a disadvantage internationally. However, they made their choice on how they were going to review it and the Compass reported it. Thank God for the Press. They help keep governments honest. Them old Caymanians used to say, "When you throw a stone in a pig pen, the one that squeel the loudest is the one that got hit."
I have been saying for years that the members of the Legislation get away with so much under the protection of the house.One can say anything about another person whilest in there but would be sued for saying it in public.Now the freedom of the press is once again being attacked for speaking out.Where is this island heading for goodness sake?Is this a case of where there’s smoke there’s fire?We are sadly lacking in transparancy and it gets worse by the day.
What about the legislative female clerk who was slapped in 2008 this was kept under wraps! how about an FOI application to examine the details surrounding that incident?
I’d like to see that, probably comes under a ministry that decides not to answer foi requests, not like there is any punishment for not answering. Plus if they can’t even keep track of travel expenses I highly doubt there is any record of this and if there is nobody will know where it is…accidently misplaced…
I know one ting! As we say, anyhow they come bringing nonsense trying to stop CNS from reporting, I am sure I speak for the general public when I say, "we ga raise h#ll!"
So in essence what the attorney is saying is that. One who lived in a glass house and was stoned must not get stoned again.
However, our fight as a people is to defend FOI and Freedom of speech.
Huh?
To: Anonymous post 9:56
You have missed the most important point being made over and over again. There is a time and place for everything. We have seen MLA’s in action before. This is not an issue surrounding respect.
The public’s view of the recent behavior of the members of the L.A. is a blow in the lower section or the foundational body structure of the rights and Freedom of Speech of the people working and living in our society.
Not only has the media been threatened under this government but the names of individuals posting in these forums have been almost demanded by the powers that be. Now I know there are some people that get intimidated by M.L.A’s and that will bend over to take whatever is coming to them in the name of victimization. But make no mistake there are people emerging in our Caymanian society that will stand up and fight for their rights too. You need to decide QUICKLY WHO YOU’RE FIGHTING! I believe we are on the threshold of "The Days Are OVER for elected Members PUSHING PEOPLE AROUND HERE IN THE CAYMAN ISLANDS ! It’s over!
At the end of the day, its not about Brian. Uzzell, and not about Brent Fuller, but its about Freedom of The Press and Freedom of information, and Freedom of Speech for every citizen and resident of the Cayman Islands.
That’s what this support of this reporter is all about.
I don’t ever remember finding myself defending the Compass before, as i have usually found it’s reporting "too safe".
But considering all that our Cayman Islands need to deal with currently, it is truly baffling and disheartening to know our highly paid Politicians are wasting time and effort on what seems to amount to trying to muzzle the Press.
The LA and it’s "esteemed" Legislators (who are calling for an apology from Mr. Fuller and the Compass for reporting what it seems are in effect the facts) surely could have taken the High Road and let well enough alone with the/his suspension and made their own report to explain their view of the matter.
This all seems embarrassingly unnecessary….and a waste of our Isands very limited resources!
I guess the people in our Glass House are really scared of those stones being thrown…
Actually, it was people who aren’t in the Glass House that started this and pushed it through. McKeeva, Mike Adam and Julianna didn’t vote for this. I think it’s politicians in general who are afraid of the press getting too close to the truth of things.
Just how much integrity is there to defend in a legislative assembly that permits days of foolish banter by money wasting incompetents but refuses to discuss any possible solution to the crime that is destroying a country?
Shows the arrogance of a monopoly newspaper and total disrespect for our Legislative Assembly.
Monopoly Newspaper? Uh Hello, you just posted a comment on one of the three local news services.
From one Caymanian to another… Shut. Up. You’re embarassing me.
By the way, have you ever heard of Freedom of the Press?
I don’t know the substance of Mr. Fuller’s article nor what the MLAs view as objectionable about it. Mr. Uzzell’s firm stance and support of his reporting staff is admirable and I congratulate him. However, I can’t help thinking that he is playing right into the hands of certain MLAs who would prefer not to have any reporters present anyway. Isn’t he giving them just what they’re asking for? Maybe an equally effective show of support would have been to send extra reporters to the LA.
If you don’t know what the issue is how can you be congratulating Mr. Uzzell on his stance? If indeed the reporter was wrong would Mr. Uzzell also not be wrong to support him in his wrongdoing?
I am normally not a big fan of Brian Uzzell’s, but I hasten to support him in the stand he has taken.
Who is Mary Lawrence to cast the first stone? A failure of a politician who has been thrust in her present position by pure political posturing on the part of the Independent Member and the UDP!
Is this really why we pay these pay these people high six figure salaries?
Your post demonstrates the very disrespect that is at issue. Whatever her political history, the Hon. Mrs. Lawrence is the Speaker of the House and should be respected as such. Mr. Uzzell’s highly personal and contemptuous attack is most unbecoming. It should not be congratulated.
A position of authority does not earn respect; the person holding it either does or does not earn the respect due to them by the job they do, not the position they hold.
Mary Lawrence is a miserably failed political aspirant (I wouldn’t call anyone who ran in so many failed election campaigns a politician) XXX.
She, herself, was the publisher of a gossip rag of a ‘newspaper’ back in the 80s that its only purpose was to harrass, hound and discredit the then LOGB, Jim Bodden, a political opponent of hers from the same district of Bodden Town. Some Caymanians have very long memories in case she’s forgotten.
I am a qualified attorney with no axe to grind on this issue. Having read them, while not expressed in these words, the overall import of the Compass’s articles appears to be to suggest that the legislators are guilty of stealthy and insidious activities with designs to curtail FOI and pose a threat to democracy. Having read the Law my view is that this comes very close if it does not cross the line. The Committee is not in fact "secret". Its membership was disclosed to the public by the AG who also made it clear that a report of its conclusions and minutes of its meetings would be available after the committee had done its work. We as a jurisdiction are well of the negative connotations associated with the word "secret" and it is arguable that the Compass intended to convey that something illicit was transpiring.
Whatever it now says the Compass must have been fully aware that "secret body" imports something more than in camera hearings. Its inferences appear to be derogatory and the question is whether they are properly supported by the facts. The Compass could seek to argue fair comment which would be built upon the facts of the Premier’s negative statements regarding FOI but the Premier is not the chairman or a member of the Committee.
In any event, in my view, Mr. McLaughlin and the Premier were correct in their assessments that it was neither necessary or appropriate to prosecute what may potentially be offences and that it in fact plays into hands of the Compass to do so.
Please don’t get me wrong I am in favour of FOI as it is a highly effective tool to hold the government accountable. I do not believe it should be curtailed in the manner suggested by the Premier. But the press does have to be careful with the nature of its comments.
"During her address the speaker had said it was time for her to act “when the free press … begins whittling away at the root of democracy … defaming the integrity of the country’s Legislative Assembly”, a comment the Compass publisher found ironic. “I remember when Mrs Lawrence was involved in putting out a weekly newspaper that was harshly critical of the integrity of certain members of Legislative Assembly,” he said".
I remember that, but what I also remember was Mrs. Lawrence’s husband and Cayman Free Press (the publishers of the Caymanian Compass) as co-defendants being successfully sued for libel by the then government*. Perhaps experience has taught her wisdom.
* http://www.caymanjudicial-legalinfo.ky/judgments/Cayman-Islands-Law-Reports/Cases/CILR1980/CILR800005.aspx
A valuable legal opinion from one qualified to give one but I notice that you’ve not gone as far as to say that this article actually violated this legislative law.
The fact is that the interpretation of the term ‘secret’ is a subjective one, even by your own rules and is open to be interpretated by any reader in whichever light they chose; that is the reason for freedom of the press, to allow a reader to retain the choice of interpretation as long as the factual content of the article is not compromised.
And again, by your very same rules, the bigger context of this situation is this UDP government’s open resistance to this FOI law and its own maneuverings to by-pass it at every opportunity and under any pretence.
What’s good for the goose is good for the gander.
A ‘qualified attorney’ citing a ruling made 30 years ago that was a very questionable interpretation of the protection granted to editors. OK, I suppose that’s one way of looking at it.
John,
You do tend to stray out of your depth. I suggest you stick to reporting and let the lawyers sort out the law. Doing a course in "business law" decades ago does not make you a lawyer, yet you have the temerity to put ‘qualified attorney’ in inverted commas when referring to me. You are by no means qualified to opine that the learned Chief Justice’s ruling was "a very questionable interpretation of the protection granted to editors" or whether it would have been successful in the UK. That is mere bluster.
As for human rights arguments you need to understand what you have written in your numbered para 2. These rights are qualified and may be curtailed as reasonably necessary in a free and democratic society. The constraints set out in the LA Powers Privileges and Immunities Law would likely fall within these parameters and I doubt that it would offend the ECHR or the Bill of Rights. Certainly, the Human Rights Commission can be invited to opine upon this.
I am trying to inject some reason and commonsense which it appears both sides lack in this case.
14:00
No need to be so harsh. Maybe you were one of those who don’t hire Cayman articles clerks?
Onto the subject. Make no mistake the public does not really rely on lawyers to sort out the law. We do our own research as we find that lawyers tell a lot lf lies, and are very often used by politicians to mislead the public. I am very leery of politicians that are attorneys because they don’t tell the truth and are self seeking and power hungry, not ruling out GREEDY!.
First, you chide me for being "so harsh" and then you go on to lambast lawyers as telling a lot of lies, and worse, politicians that are lawyers because they (apparently above all politicians) are not only liars but are self-seeking, power-hungry and greedy. Perhaps if you reflect on what you have written you will see the contradiction in your words.
Unlike your little diatribe, my comments were factual and rational.
Perhaps you, Mr. Evans and Martin Polaine can establish a law school together since none of you requires any actual knowledge or understanding of Cayman Islands law or admission to the Cayman bar in order to be able to offer Cayman Islands legal advice.
Well done Brian Uzzell! Your actions and words are spot on. Mrs Lawrence must have forgotten about the Herald and the scandal sheet "The Voice" which she and her husband published berating the deeds and characters of the Unity Team.
What is it Nazi Germany down there? No more freedom of the press means no freedom of speach. Tourists should boycott the Cayman Islands until they allow their media the right to free speach.
This is ridiculous and I would like to see other news agencies take the same stance, where are the rights of the press and freedoms of opinions?? Everyday this country seems to be moving closer to a dictatorship, thankfully someone is willing to stand up.
This has happened in the Cayman Islands in the 21st century unbelievable, shame on Ezzard and those who voted with him.
Thank God Ezzard does not lead the government.
I thought Ezzard was for the people, but he is just as bad as the rest of that lot!
Well done to those members of the LA that voted yes to Ezzard’s motion to prosecute the newspaper and writer of the editorial.
If your skin is not thick enough to take a bit of criticism then you are in the wrong line of work.
Once again the people will suffer because the politicians have made reporting unsafe for local media.
Ever hear of freedom of the press?
When the Legislative Assembly begins whittling away at the root of democracy, defaming the integrity of the country’s free press, it is time for the people to act!
I cannot believe what I am reading. It seems that we the people need to quickly take the constitution back to the table and deal with this Freedom of the Press issue.
If the reporters are not using lap tops then truly they can’t be using note pads? this makes them less efficient. This is not right, Cayman now has a dictatorship government and the UK just does not care. We have a governor that is silent beyond all human comprehension. What is his problem?
It is true that history repeats itself. But people really need to be reminded that they could never ever in this world nor in the world to come get elected in her own district of Bodden Town because of the history of an old newspaper called the Tradewinds. Yes a newspaper that thrived and printed 99% "Marl Road Gossip" which destroyed the character and reputation of too many Caymanians young and old, BACK IN THE DAY!
XXXX
While I am a strong advocate that we should put our people first, this matter is not just about Brent Fuller it is about FREEDOM of speech and the Press period. It’s about the Freedom of the people of the Cayman Islands.
Caymanians and X-pats we must stand for our rights and freedoms. Mr. Ezzard Miller and the Speaker Mary Lawrence should be ashamed of themselves and I am very surprised at this behavior, I am heartbroken and very disappointed, I expected better of a member that was himself given a SECOND CHANCE! He is risking his re-election in North Side XXXX. Mr.Arden McLean if you were using your smarts you would have stopped Ezzard before he went this far. This is deJa vu flashback of the scenes from the episode of " foot on briefcase, Cow Boy Hat Wild Wild West" attitude of arrogance all over again! This kind of behavior of Mr. Miller makes Mr. McKeeva Bush SUDDENLY look like he can do no wrong in our eyes.
Looking at this through eyes of political strategy this course of action against a member of our society by government serves to strengthen the arm of the UDP and weaken the PPM party. At the same time it will without a doubt erode thebase of the Independent movement, leaving two parties standing, a strong UDP and a weakened PPM XXX.
I sympathize with Mr. Brent Fuller, I’m a Caymanian and I did my part serving as deputy chairman of the group responsible for drafting the new constitution just enacted in 2009. I am not afraid to come up against anyone BECAUSE YOU BOTH ARE WRONG this time! No, the compass should not apologize, the L.A. is responsible for making reports that are clear, and comprehensive. There seems to have been something missing from the information Mr. Fuller received. Now you demand that he must apologize for your short comings? No Brent do not apologize, thank God we finally found ONE MAN that will STAND UP to bullying legislators.
Kudos Brent and Mr. Uzzell, you have my support on this one.
We do need a human shield, yes to protect us from this kind of dictatorship.
Can anybody say "Desmond?"
Well done and well said Brian.
There is a certain amount of decorum that is necessary in the Legislative Assembly and the press should be mindful and respectful of that.
For too long, the press has done certain things to disrespect the honor and protocol of the house and this must stop.
I am very perturbed with Mr. Uzzell for making this issue with the Speaker a personal one. What she did in her past is her personal business. Upholding the laws and regulations of the Parliament is the people’s business and something that she is mandated to do. Calling her names such as ‘a five times frustrated politician" is disrespectful and wrong and I think he needs to apologize to this lady. She is not a politician but the Speaker. She was not elected therefore she is not a politician.
I am very discouraged when journalists come to our shores and are very unaccepting of our customs and beliefs and are disrespectful of our laws and our house of parliament. I am no expat basher but I see no real Caymanians out there in the journalism field disrespecting us and our laws. I should say at this point a special Kudos to Ms. Carol Winkler, a true journalist not a sensationalist who came to our shores made it home, respected us and reported the truth from both sides and did so in a very professional manner. She is one of a dying breed.
We all must remember the infamous Desmond Seales and the damage he wreaked on this country. It would appear that Brian Uzzell and others, which I won’t speak of because I probably won’t get this published if I do, are jockeying for position of the new "Desmond" in Cayman.
I believe it is type that respect is given and that journalist trying to sell newspapers and blogs need to understand that what they do is not above the law but that they should be respectful of it, as well.
Mr Uzzell, I call on you to do the right thing and apologize to Ms. Lawrence, if for nothing else the name calling and disrespect outside the house on her personally. Be a man!!!
“I am no expat basher but…”
The public of the Cayman Islands should by now be very leery of ‘closed door committees’, ‘secret committees’ ‘committees-in-camera’ or any other name in the English language that you wish to refer to them as.
The negotiations that produced this new Constitution was held in ‘secret’ without public input or observation and look what it has gotten the Cayman Islands now !
A country with a political leader and government seeking to bypass an established law that calls for the government to be forthcoming with requested information XXXXX.
Cayman needs to thank the Compass for the position they’ve taken.
Remember sometimes ago when the Public was driven out of the Legislative Assembly?. They were called STRANGERSby Miss Julie. Perhaps the Press is now faced with the same ordeal. UNNA MEMRY TOO SHORT MAN. Alot of frequent visitors to the LA has never returned since that day. That was the worst insult ever given to the public since my time from a Politician.
Anonymous 19:20
You stand corrected here and now. The input for the constitution that we now have has followed a course of NATION WIDE CONSULTATION ! There was nothing secretive about it at all.
WHERE WERE YOU had you already relocated to the UK or the US? The commissioners were literally begging people to come out to the meetings, people get the government and constitution they deserve!
19:20 you are definitely wrong on this one.