How can any country, boasting of its accomplishments in freedom of speech, jail a man for immoral words in a song?
Jun 18, 2025
Dear Editor,
Kaieteur News – The recent discourse surrounding the imprisonment of Daniel Wharton- popularly known as “Baby Skello”- for his offensive remarks about a revered Hindu deity disturbs me.
I am a Christian, specifically a Catholic, to us Christians, Jesus IS GOD, and I don’t know how many times I heard the swear “Jesus f..king Christ” even in movies, for heaven’s sake. And I cannot begin to describe how offensive I find it to be. Whatever movie or programme I am involved with, I immediately switch it off.
I am not going to get into any argument on the matter of whether what Baby Skello said was morally correct, or if what he said was offensive and disturbing to a certain section of the population. He is guaranteed freedom of speech under the Guyana constitution; he can, of course, be sanctioned, as in the banning of the song. I understand he has already quite appropriately issued a public apology.
In the landmark case of Sunday Times V United Kingdom (No. 2 ) in the European Court of Human Rights, of 26th November 1991, Series A No. 217 Paragraph 50 made the following declaration: Freedom of speech constitutes one of the essential foundations of a democratic Society, subject to the prescribed exceptions in the covenant, it is applicable not only to information and ideas that are favourably received or regarded as inoffensive but to those that offend, shock or disturb. Such are the demands of that pluralism, tolerance and broadmindedness without which there is no Democratic Society. Guyana signed the Covenant of Civil and Political Rights [CCPR] on 15th February 1977.
On April 6th 2024 [that’s last year, Editor] the government of Guyana published a very long letter captioned “Guyana proud of its achievements in Civil and Political Rights” and after a very long harangue of identifying the wonderful, broadminded tolerances exercised by the Guyana Government, it was signed Ministry of Parliamentary Affairs and Governance.
How can any country, boasting of its accomplishments in freedom of speech, jail a man for immoral words in a song? Offensive? Yes. Disturbing? Yes. Immoral? Certainly. But warranting jail? I think not. It’s not as if I know the man or that someone has asked me to say something, I never even heard the offending song, I consider jailing that man a violation of my and his constitutional rights to free speech. And it could be extended to violate even more of our freedom of speech rights, unless that man is released from prison today!
There are, of course, exceptions to article 19 of the UN Covenant of Civil and Political Rights guaranteeing free speech, but none of them apply to this matter.
Regards,
Tony Vieira
Related
Similar Articles
