In a significant escalation of Trinidad and Tobago’s political tensions, former Prime Minister Dr. Keith Rowley has declared he will publicly respond to any perceived slander from current Prime Minister Kamla Persad-Bissessar made within Parliament’s chambers. The opposition leader’s statement comes amid a brewing controversy surrounding media regulation and freedom of expression.
The political clash intensified when the Telecommunications Authority of Trinidad and Tobago (TATT) issued a formal warning to CNC3 television on March 20th, citing potential violations of broadcast content regulations. TATT’s letter specifically referenced Section D9 of licensing agreements, which prohibits content that discriminates or portrays individuals negatively based on race, origin, class, religion, or sex.
This regulatory intervention follows Rowley’s controversial reference to Persad-Bissessar as a ‘jamette’ during a news conference at his Glencoe residence. The remark came in response to the Prime Minister’s allegations that the People’s National Movement (PNM) utilized criminal funds for Balisier House renovations. Both television broadcasts and print media coverage disseminated these exchanges nationwide.
Rowley, communicating via WhatsApp and later Facebook, expressed profound concerns regarding TATT’s timing and motives. He questioned whether the authority represented a novel establishment in Trinidad and Tobago, suggesting possible political influence behind its recent actions. The former PM drew parallels to international patterns of media suppression, asking rhetorically if this constituted ‘threatening of the media part of what is happening abroad.’
Highlighting perceived inconsistencies, Rowley referenced former United National Congress minister Jack Warner’s past allegations during election campaigns, demanding to know TATT’s whereabouts during those controversies. He specifically mentioned Warner’s claims about a former prime minister allegedly using taxpayer money to benefit associates with state positions.
Rowley maintained that Persad-Bissessar ‘is only a victim when she is challenged,’ while defending his right to respond to parliamentary allegations externally. He concluded with defiance, stating critics ‘could take a hike’ and reaffirming his commitment to answer any slanderous statements made within Parliament through appropriate public channels.