Dear Editor,
I write with reference to an article titled ‘Missing files still denying justice’ which appeared on Page 9 of the February 7 edition of the Sunday Stabroek.
The author of the said article erroneously quoted me as saying that I do not speak with the media. The author failed to report that her attempts to reach me proved futile because I was at the time engaged in official business as was communicated to her by my secretary. I am not on record as having made any such statement. Further, at no time have I denied permission to senior officials of the Registry to speak with the media on this issue.
The article insinuated that the deposition of Dr Abdel Abubakar Bari and Atta Sankar disappeared because the current management of the Supreme Court Registry is not firm on securing files at the Registry.
For the record, I wish to state that the said deposition was determined to be missing prior to October 13, 2009, the date on which I was appointed Registrar (ag) of the Supreme Court of Judicature. The records in my possession reveal that an audit was conducted on or around October 2006, and it was at that time that it was discovered that the aforesaid deposition was missing.
In light of the above, it is my polite view that journalistic ethics would dictate that media houses should refrain from publishing false, misleading and damaging articles. It is the least that is expected of responsible media houses. Further, I am of the view that Stabroek News should, apart from issuing an apology, retract and correct in its next publication the report referred to above.
Yours faithfully,
Bibi Shabena Ali
Registrar (ag)
Editor’s note
The sequence of attempts to contact Registrar (ag), Ms Bibi Ali was as follows:
On January 26, 2010, Chancellor of the Judiciary (ag), Justice Carl Singh, when contacted about missing files in court cases advised our reporter to speak with the Registrar. The Chancellor indicated that Ms Ali would speak, and a telephone call was placed to her office a few minutes later. However, her Secretary said that she was out of the office. Several telephone calls followed over three consecutive days, and on each occasion Ms Ali was unavailable.
Our reporter went to the Registry in person on February 1, and was advised to return shortly, which she did. However, the Registrar was once again unavailable. A third visit followed on February 2, and once more she was not available. Finally, on the morning of February 3 another attempt was made, but still Ms Ali could not be reached. It was then that a senior official of the court (not Ms Ali personally, as her letter might imply) told the reporter that the Registrar had said she “does not speak to the media.” No further attempts were made to contact Ms Ali prior to the publication of the report on February 7.
The only specific reason Ms Ali’s Secretary conveyed for the Registrar’s inability to speak to our reporter other than the fact that she was out, was that she was in a meeting.
Our reporter did tell Ms Ali’s Secretary that she was seeking a comment on the matter of missing files, so there was no vagueness about the subject of her enquiry. Furthermore, the reporter showed considerable patience and persistence in attempting to give the Registrar every opportunity to have her views made public. If the times when the reporter phoned or presented herself at the Registry were inconvenient in terms of her schedule, Ms Ali had the option of asking her Secretary to call this newspaper and arrange a time which was convenient to her, or conversely, to delegate a member of her senior staff to speak to the reporter, since according to what she states above, she has never denied them permission to do so on this issue. However, she did neither of these things. Even after the last attempt by the reporter to speak to Ms Ali at the Registry, there was a clear three-day gap before publication of the article when she still would have had time to contact Stabroek News to have her comments included. Again, she elected not to do this. Ms Ali, therefore, cannot blame this newspaper for accepting the senior official’s statement that she “does not speak to the media,” when all the evidence points ineluctably in that direction.
There is no indication in the report as to when the files in the Dr Bari case went missing.
