PORT OF SPAIN, Trinidad, CMC – A High Court judge Wednesday granted newly appointed Energy and Energy Industries Minister, Dr. Roodal Moonilal, until June 16 to file a defense in a defamation lawsuit brought against him by two investment entities and a businessman.
Justice Frank Seepersad disclosed during a virtual hearing that he had granted Moonilal the extension he had sought to file his defense in the defamation lawsuit filed by Trillions Systems Ltd, Rose Capital Investments Ltd, and businessman James Kerron Rose.
According to the claim, Moonilal, who became a government minister following the April 28 general election here, published false, malicious, and defamatory allegations linking the companies and Rose to illegal quarrying and questionable state contracts.
“The defendant as a politician and member of parliament knew or ought to have known that the said posts would be particularly sensational and that the court would be asked to infer that the defendant made those publications with the knowledge that it was libelous and/or reckless as to the false contents and nature of the article and that no regard was given or attempted to be given as to its truth,” they said in the lawsuit.
The lawsuit contends that Moonilal defamed them during a press briefing that was live-streamed on Facebook on the official page of the then-opposition United National Congress (UNC) on September 8, 2024, and on Moonilal’s personal social media accounts.
The claimants are seeking damages for reputational harm, business loss, and emotional distress and have demanded a full retraction and apology. They are also seeking the removal of all defamatory content from Moonilal’s social media platforms and UNC’s pages and an injunction to prevent the future publication of similar statements.
According to their claim, the statements referred to business activities and documents linked to the companies and Rose, including material concerning a contract and a cheque related to the Housing Development Corporation (HDC). The claim pointed to using a directory listing and other materials during the broadcast.
The claimants also argue that the publication led to unwanted public scrutiny and that the matter was presented without their verification. They maintained that the publication affected their operations and relationships with clients and stakeholders.
The claim further references an alleged misidentification involving a photograph of a different individual with a similar name, which the claim said caused additional confusion. Despite concerns raised, the lawsuit maintained that clarifications were not extended to Rose and the companies.
In support of their case, the claimants maintained their record of community development work and longstanding business reputations in finance, insurance, and real estate. They argue that the statements were widely disseminated online and remain accessible.
The lawsuit said that during the briefing, Moonilal admitted he could not verify the authenticity of some documents but shared them anyway with viewers. This prompted “a storm of online speculation and defamatory commentary.”
The claimants said that Moonilal’s actions amounted to “reckless disregard for the truth,” the accusations had no factual basis but were presented sensationally, which caused reputational harm.
and then 