Dean Barrow’s Name to be Removed from Commission of Inquiry’s Report

Former Prime Minister Dean Barrow is also suing the government on a similar basis.  He too was called before the commission and his name was also published in its report. In this case, however, an agreement could not be met between the attorneys representing both parties. As a result, the case will be heard in full in the days ahead. Not only will all references to Barrow’s name be redacted, certain information will also be edited from the final document. That’s where it may prove a bit contentious.

Dean Barrow

Dean Barrow, Attorney-at-law

“There was an attempt to settle that matter along the same lines as the settlement that has now been reached in Patt’s case. Those attempts did not succeed. My lawyer, Naima Barrow, advises me that they were unable to find common ground as to the extent to which the redactions should go. In other words, government admitted that there needed to be redactions, that my name needed to be removed. I believe, though, that my lawyer might have said that well it is not just that my client’s name has to be removed. When you refer to the ministry in contexts that make clear that you are in fact referring to the minister, even if you don’t call his name, or even if you don’t say minister, those passages as well, ought to be removed. There couldn’t be agreement on that. So that goes to court now for a full hearing; however, in their submissions, the government, the attorney general and the commission, the lawyers for them have conceded that my natural justice rights were also breached. So there’s no argument about that, I have to be paid the costs for the claim, that I am entitled, as well, to damages. The problem is though, the consequence of those admissions in terms of what exactly needs to come out of the report is what will be in issue. The court will now have to decide whether the full extent of my lawyer’s insistence in terms of what is to come out is to be upheld or it is less than what my lawyers insist on should be removed from the report. So that will be the key issue and of course, as with Patt, there will then need, there will have to be as well the court’s determination as to the amount of damages that I would get.”