- J4 P167 defamatory meaning the appellant had attached to the words complained of, as per paragraph 8 of the statement of claim. That paragraph reads: “8 In their natural and ordinary meaning the words complained of in paragraphs 5 to 7 above meant or were understood to mean that the Plaintiff is an ingenious, surreptiuos and deceitful fellow with clandestine overtures.” The 2nd respondent pleaded three defences. The 1st was justification that the words complained of: “are true in substance and fact”. This defence was pleaded in summary form. No particulars were given, as required by rules of pleading in this area. The 2nd defence was estopel that the appellant gave the 2nd respondent: “the impression that if an apology was tendered the matter would end there.” The 3rd defence is denial. That the words complained of are not defamatory. After evaluating the evidence, the learned trial Judge dismissed the claim as against both respondents. He held that the respondents published the words complained of in execution of their duty to inform the public on matters of public interest. He found that it was a matter of public interest that Hon. Sonkotwe, P.W.3, had been charged by his then political party, the M.M.D, for