³In a free democratic society it is almost too obvious to need stating that those who hold office in government and who are responsible for public administration must always be open to criticism. Any attempt to stifle or fetter such criticism amounts to political censorship of the most insidious and objectionable kind".
The above was taken from the passage of a Privy Council ruling by Lord Bridge of Harwich in the case of Tim Hector vs Attorney-General of Antigua.
This is so applicable to what is actually happening in Grenada at this very moment under the rule of the New National Party (NNP) government of Prime Minister Dr. Keith Mitchell.
The political censorship of the media is taking on increasing proportions each and every passing day.
Only last week, certain sections of the media were cowered into submission by the authorities. These media houses covered a press conference involving attorney-at-law, Anslem Clouden and former Leader of the Opposition, Michael Baptiste to deal with the latest turn of events in the Briefcase saga involving Prime Minister Dr. Keith Mitchell.
The two gentlemen wanted to bring to the attention of the public the evidence in their possession of the clear and open attempt by Deputy Prime Minister, Gregory Bowen to try and prevent the custodian of the alleged video-tape with the bribery payment from handing over the"evidence" as ordered by a U.S court.
A U.S Attorney-at-law, acting on behalf of Mr. Bowen visited the facility last week where Mr. Resteiner was being questioned and advised him not to answer questions about the video-tape matter, not to co-operate with the proceedings and to hush his mouth by taking the Fifth Amendment.
Both Clouden and Baptiste have documentary evidence of this occurrence in the United States and decided to bring the issue to the attention of the public.
GRENADA TODAY is fully aware that one radio station and television station attended the press conference but were pressured by the powers-that-be into not broadcasting anything from that press briefing.
The owner of that station personally took possession of the tapes from the press conference and denied the journalist in his employment from using anything that was said by either Mr. Clouden or Baptiste.
It is known by all and sundry in the media that that particular media owner is called from time to time to the Ministerial Complex in the Botanical Gardens for a vicious tongue lashing from the powers-that-be for allowing his media house to fall out of line.
GRENADA TODAY is very much concerned about the new turn of events in the Briefcase Issue involving both Minister Bowen and his attorney in the United States.
The NNP apparatus wanted us to believe that the video-tape allegedly depicting the bribery payment to the Prime Minister never existed and was a figment of someone's imagination.
There is now overwhelming evidence that the tape exists and that even the FBI in the United States have a copy of that"prized possession" that can change the political landscape in Grenada.
Why would Minister Gregory Bowen and his lawyer try to prevent Eric Restiener from handing over the video-tape to Mr. Jack Grynberg as ordered by a high court judge in the United States?
If there is no such tape that can lead to a criminal investigation of the Prime Minister, why worry about the ruling from the judge that Mr. Resteiner should make it available.
If we are to believe the Prime Minister, he received"approximately $US15, 000" from Mr. Resteiner in Switzerland in 2000 and that he had never seen nor taken possession of any briefcase from the con-man.
The only logical conclusion is that Prime Minister Mitchell would be exonerated if Mr. Resteiner's video-tape shows that a briefcase was involved in the transaction.
What we suspect that might be causing anxiety, nightmare, headaches and heart pains to the Prime Minister and Company is the plan by Mr. Grynberg to get Mr. Resteiner to say on record before the judge, the exact amount of money that was given to the Prime Minister at his villa and for what purpose.
The alleged briefcase by itself would only show money but no one can truly say how much it really contains.
It might be a horse of a different colour if Mr. Resteiner can testify on oath as to the sum that was given and whether it was to help offset the cost of the Prime Minister's trip or in the form of an alleged bribe.
And this bring us back to the role being played by Mr. Bowen in this unfortunate incident which we need to do everything possible to try and close as soon as possible.
Was Mr. Bowen engaged in a deliberate attempt to pervert justice in the briefcase issue?
Is he a party to what allegedly transpired at the luxury villa at St.
Moritz, Switzerland between Prime Minister Mitchell and our conman so-called Trade Counsellor, Eric Resteiner?
The jury would bring back their decision "all in the fulness of time".
