(MISA/IFEX) - On 18 May 2006, the Supreme Court of Swaziland reversed a July 2005 decision by the High Court of Swaziland that obliged the "Times of Swaziland" newspaper to pay Swaziland's deputy prime minister, Albert Shabangu, a staggering E750 000 (approx. US$116,000) for alleged defamation.
Shabangu lost the case with costs and has to pay more than E60 000 (approx. US$10,000) in legal fees.
Shabangu had sued for E1 million (approx. US$155,000) for defamation following an article the "Times of Swaziland" published a few years ago, alleging that he was a card-carrying member of the Ngwane National Liberatory Congress (NNLC), a banned political party in Swaziland, and that he was plotting the downfall of the then-Prime Minister Sibusiso Dlamini.
In its landmark judgment, the Supreme Court not only found that there was nothing defamatory in the article but also that the award of E750 000 was grossly excessive. Supreme Court Judge Justice Magid observed that even if there were any defamatory aspects in the said article, (if he were the trial judge) he would not have been inclined to award even as much as E50 000 (approx. US$8,300) to Shabangu.
The judge then warned other courts that may have to deliberate upon claims of damages for defamation in future to be reasonable in their judgments.
"It must be borne in mind that an award of damages in a defamation case is to afford some solatium for the injuria done to the plaintiff. And no doubt, having regard to the social and political status of the respondent, a court would be inclined perhaps to err on the high side in awarding him damages for defamation," he said.
During the case, Shabangu had denied being a card-carrying member of the NNLC, claiming that the article defamed him and placed his position in government in a predicament since political parties were banned in Swaziland.
But in his judgement, Magid - sitting with Justice R.A Banda and Justice M.M Ramodibedi - said the passages from the article were not defamatory of Shabangu in the manner alleged.
"There was considerable debate as to whether the respondent had been shown still to be a member of the NNLC. But if, as I have found, the allegation of membership in the NNLC is not itself defamatory, the truth or otherwise of the allegation is immaterial," the judge said.
He said the evidence of one Shu Lukhele, who was called by the "Times of Swaziland" as its witness, was virtually unchallenged.
"It is true that the witness, an elderly farmer, appeared a little vague about dates, but for the rest his evidence as to the activities of the NNLC was virtually unchallenged. Certainly his positive statement to the effect that the NNLC had never advocated violence or making the country ungovernable to achieve its aims was not even challenged in cross-examination," the judge observed.
On 19 May, an obviously elated managing editor of the "Times of Swaziland", Martin Dlamini, welcomed the Supreme Court ruling. Dlamini told MISA-Swaziland that justice had been done. He said it had been their argument all along that there was nothing defamatory in the article.
Even if it was defamatory, he said they felt the award of E750 000 awarded by High Court judge Josiah Matsebula was grossly excessive. Dlamini said they were happy that the Supreme Court agreed with them.
MISA-Swaziland welcomes the Supreme Court ruling, and considers the judgment not only victory for the "Times of Swaziland" but also for media freedom in general.
