Freedom of speech must never be tantamount to death threats

Dear Editor,
I am very sore with this WPA’s Kidackie Amsterdam, for his vitriolic and threatening outburst, when, as alleged, on May 27, 2024, at Peter Rose and Anira Streets, Queenstown, Georgetown, “… he intentionally transmitted, by use of a computer system, words spoken in a video that encouraged or incited persons to murder President Dr Irfaan Ali, Vice President Dr Bharrat Jagdeo, Attorney General Anil Nandlall, and Finance Minister Dr Ashni Singh. It is a most deplorable act, and apart from outright condemnation from one and all, this ‘crime’ must be meted with a swift trial.
In this vein, I am pleased to note that this trial seems imminent, as Kidackie Amsterdam, after his arrest and after his in-prison transit, was granted $200,000 bail on his purported cybercrime charge (under the Cybercrime Act). Upon hearing the charge, read to him by Principal Magistrate Faith Mc Gusty, Kidackie pleaded ‘not guilty.’ Well, I am awaiting the unfolding of this critical issue. However, I do have some important points to share with our readers.
First, I remind all, that we, as humans, all have a right to personal safety. It is illegal to kill, inflict personal bodily harm, or threaten to do so (on someone else). This kind of language borders on “terroristic threats.” It is indeed a criminal act when someone threatens to kill or seriously injure someone else. This threat may be verbal, in writing, or sent via an electronic medium. It usually leaves the intended victim/s in a state of reasonably sustained fear for their safety. What I can say about Kidackie (as evident in the outburst) is that he seems oblivious to ‘the fact that freedom does not mean a person can extend that very freedom to harm another person or sully his reputation, or make a promise or commitment to do so. It is unethical, immoral and for sure, very illegal.
Let me carefully point out too that it doesn’t matter whether or not that person, issuing the threat, can carry it out, or may not have meant it. That person, after trial, if found guilty of making criminal threats, will be sentenced. No ‘ifs’ and no ‘buts.’ As a caveat, we must know that all forms of speech must be free from escalating into something more dangerous, particularly incitement to discrimination, hostility and violence, which are all prohibited in just about every country.
Where the United Nations is concerned, “Hate Speech is defined as… “any kind of communication in speech, writing or behaviour, that attacks or uses pejorative or discriminatory language concerning a person or a group based on who they are, in other words, based on their religion, ethnicity, nationality, race, colour, descent, gender or other identity factor.” We must realise that hate speech, whether online or offline, poses a threat to democracy and human rights.
As expected, and rightfully so, Attorney-General and Minister of Legal Affairs, Anil Nandlall, S.C., expressed his strong disapproval of the conduct exhibited by Amsterdam, who hosts a Facebook programme, pandering to anti-government sentiments. In educating the public, he pointed out that “… talk show hosts (for example, Kidackie) and the callers, are equally responsible, under the law, when viewers or listeners express their opinions, especially with such hostile remarks.” He stated “ … when you have a programme and you encourage colleagues, you encourage listeners and viewers to call in and give them a platform, you are equally responsible for what they say once you offer them that platform. Because, had it not been for your platform, they would not have been able to say what they are saying.”
As we all recall and can go back and visit the footage, “During the broadcast, a caller incited violence against some high-ranking government officials, suggesting that, President Ali, Vice-President Dr Bharrat Jagdeo, Nandlall, and Senior Minister in the Office of the President with Responsibility for Finance and Public Service, Dr Ashni Singh should be beheaded, and (have) their heads displayed publicly on the seawalls.”
This kind of talk must never be condoned where the law is concerned. So, we will await June 10, 2024, when Acting Chief Magistrate Sherdel Isaacs-Marcus will further proceedings.
By the way, according to law, and as the AG pointed out, the penalty for this offence is severe. If convicted on indictment, Amsterdam faces up to five years of imprisonment. (And) should the commission of the offence result in the death of the President, any Government member, or any other person, he, Kidackie, is liable to imprisonment for life, as stipulated by the Act.

Yours truly,
HB Singh