Why did he offer to pay?
Blogger Leong Sze Hian ordered to pay PM Lee S$133,000 in damages for defamation
Lee Hsien Loong Leong Sze Hian collage
Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong (left) and blogger Leong Sze Hian at the High Court on Oct 6, 2020. (Photos: Reuters, Gaya Chandramohan)
24 Mar 2021 12:01PM
Bookmark
SINGAPORE: A court on Wednesday (Mar 24) ordered blogger Leong Sze Hian to pay Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong S$133,000 for defaming him in a Facebook post.
Mr Leong had shared an article by Malaysian website The Coverage in a public Facebook post in November 2018. The article, which was posted with no accompanying caption, alleged that Mr Lee had helped former Malaysian prime minister Najib Razak launder money in relation to scandal-hit Malaysian state fund 1Malaysia Development Berhad.
Justice Aedit Abdullah found that Mr Leong could not "reasonably claim that the defamatory words did not impugn (Mr Lee's) character". The words suggest that Mr Lee was, "at the very least, involved in serious and dishonest criminal activity".
He found that Mr Leong had "published" the article because it was part of his Facebook post, being hyperlinked to it, and because Mr Leong had made it accessible.
A total of 45 people responded to Mr Leong's Facebook post containing the link to the article, and the privacy settings of the post were set to public, said the judge.
He ruled that the Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Act (POFMA) does not alter the law of defamation in Singapore, as contested by Mr Leong and his lawyer Lim Tean.
Mr Leong had contended that POFMA has a direct and significant impact on defamation, as an individual should not be able to bypass POFMA and sue in defamation if the former allows for it.
In contrast, Mr Lee and his lawyer, Senior Counsel Davinder Singh, argued that POFMA is separate from and has not changed the law of defamation in Singapore.
Justice Abdullah found that POFMA is concerned with falsehoods rather than the harm caused to reputation, and meant to avoid or minimise damage to the country and its people, or public confidence in the Government and its agencies endangered by online falsehoods.
"However, the POFMA does not provide individuals with any right or cause of action arising from a false and defamatory allegation against them. This is a key distinction," he said.
The judge rejected Mr Leong's arguments that the lawsuit against him was an abuse of process.
Mr Lee had asked for damages in line with the case of Roy Ngerng, where S$150,000 was awarded. Mr Leong's lawyer asked instead to pay damages as low as S$1.