Baby Skello released on bail after High Court intervention

– days after remand for blasphemous libel

Daniel Wharton, popularly known as “Baby Skello”, who was recently remanded to prison on a charge of blasphemous libel, has been granted bail in the sum of $45,000 following an application in the High Court by his lawyers.
On June 13, Wharton was remanded to prison at the Diamond Magistrates Court by Senior Magistrate Judy Latchman until July 1. This was in relation to a song he released on social media, containing several vulgar lyrics about the Hindu deity Maha Lakshmi.

At the time, his being remanded to prison did not go down well with sections of society, with several persons in the legal field criticising the decision and even questioning why blasphemous libel was still on Guyana’s statute books.
On Tuesday, it was confirmed that Attorneys-at-Law Dexter Todd and Everton Singh Lammy had approached High Court Judge Simone Morris and were able to secure $45,000 bail for Baby Skello.
In an invited comment, Lammy noted that Wharton should have never been remanded in the first place for such an offence. According to Lammy, “I don’t speak to the media on matters that are sub judice, but I’ll make an exception in this case and just say that bail should not have been refused.”
One of those who publicly spoke out against Baby Skello being remanded was Education Minister Priya Manickchand, who is a lawyer by profession. Her initial public opinions on the case had attracted profanity-laced criticism from social media personality Mikhail Rodrigues, aka Guyanese critic, but on Monday Manickchand stuck to her principles.
“If I were to pick myself up from here, waste some time and walk over to the cybercrime unit, and make a complaint, he most likely would be charged. If he were charged, and he went before the courts, two things would happen,” the minister said.
“One, he would get bail. Which would reinforce my point that these laws are not being applied consistently. Or he would not get bail. And he would be thrown into jail until his next hearing date. And if that were to happen, I would find it absolutely ridiculous and… I would fight for him to get pretrial liberty. Because that is what our constitution guarantees.”
On her personal Facebook page a few days ago, Manickchand had noted that the court not only has to be consistent but also sensible in how the law is applied. She had also been critical of the fact that Domestic Violence (DV) matters before the court are often not given the same level of attention.
“The bench needs to be consistent and sensible in its application of the law. We are jailing someone for mumbling or trying to sing something offensive against a female goddess (which was terrible and should never be encouraged or listened to and which I personally condemned) but failing to address speedily DV matters where women are at the mercy of the court, failing to address matters of cyber-bullying where women’s nude photographs are published online without their consent and other truly egregious crimes against women. I truly hope he has a lawyer who will have this odd decision reversed at the high court,” the minister had said.
Someone else who had been critical of the Magistrate’s Court decision to remand Baby Skello was Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM) Commissioner Sase Gunraj, himself an attorney-at-law. He had described the remand of Baby Skello as unnecessary and excessive, noting that refusal of bail should not be used as a penalty.
“The remand of Baby Skello is unnecessary and excessive. His attempt at music was undoubtedly blasphemous and disrespectful, but refusal of bail ought not to be used as a penalty,” Gunraj said.
There have since been calls, for instance from the Alliance For Change (AFC) for the repeal of blasphemous libel from Guyana’s statute books, with the party arguing that such laws are archaic and incompatible.