JUDGMENT

Salleh Abas FJ (delivering the judgment of the Court):

As far as can be gleaned from the evidence given at the trial, the factual background of this case began with the arrest and detention of the sixth appellant Chan Siaw Hee and two other persons, Lim Kim Seng and Teng Chew Seng. All three were members of the Sarawak United People's Party (SUPP). On 1 November 1969 all three were released. On the same day a press conference arranged for the sixth appellant by the Information Department was held at Radio Malaysia Sarawak Building, and on the following day (2 November 1969) the Sarawak Vanguard, a Chinese language newspaper owned and controlled by the respondent and his family devoted its front page to carry the news of the release and the sixth appellant's press conference. It appears that after the release the sixth appellant became the publicity officer of SUPP whilst the position of the other two ex-detainees in the party was uncertain. This situation led to what appears to be a misunderstanding between these two men. Soon the Sarawak Vanguard and other Chinese language newspapers in Sarawak, i.e. the Sarawak International Times and the Sarawak Siang Pao began to print articles and letters concerning the positions of the sixth appellant and Mr. Lim Kim Seng. The Sarawak Vanguard seemed to take the side of Mr. Lim Kim Seng whilst the other newspapers the side of the sixth appellant. Between 2 November 1969 and 21 November 1970, the Sarawak Vanguard published no less than six articles and letters under various sarcastic pen names such as "Grave Digger Evergreen Willow", "Fox Tiga" and "Curry Rice", all critical of the sixth appellant. These articles and letters were produced as Exhs D2(a)-(f). Presumably provoked by these letters and articles, the sixth appellant wrote an open letter critical of the respondent. This letter was published in the Sarawak International Times and the Sarawak Siang Pao on 23 November 1970, just two days after the Sarawak Vanguard published Exh. D2(f), which purported to be a re-publication of the sixth appellant's press conference held on 2 November 1969.

The respondent took exception to the following two sentences of the open letter which read as follows:

(1) Recently I think Mr. Leong is exceptionally strong in his physical strength even though he is briskly playing around and entangling with his numerous 'imperial concubines,' he still can find time to hire out his strength for his intimate friend Lim .... ;

(2) ... let it not because he has given so much devotion to his 'imperial concubines' so much so that his mind is not steady and he has no heart to check up the headline which was published a year ago..

An apology was demanded of the sixth appellant and the two newspapers, the Sarawak International Times and the Sarawak Siang Pao. As this was not forthcoming from any of them, the respondent started the present Court proceedings suing the appellants for defamation on account of the two sentences in the open letter. The appellants did not deny that the open letter was written by the sixth appellant and published by the two newspapers but claimed that its English translation furnished by the respondent was not accurate and that the words complained of do not bear any meaning defamatory of the respondent. At the trial the respondent submitted two versions of the translations, Exhs. P3 and P4, whilst the appellants submitted their own version Exh. D3. However, nothing really turns upon these three exhibits as the translations are substantially the same. The learned trial Judge held that the words complained of are defamatory of the respondent and since no appeal is raised against the ruling on this point, nothing more will be said on it.

The appellants' main defences are justification and fair comment. At the trial the appellants called three witnesses to prove these defences; whilst the respondent did not lead any evidence in rebuttal at all. The learned trial Judge after consider