enforced changes. The Plaintiff’s standing is also high because of her position as Senate President. [65] It was submitted that the highest ever award was in the case of The Editor, The Times of Swaziland and Others vs Martin Akker Supreme Court Case No. 44/2009 where a sum of E100 000.00 was awarded as damages. Whilst that may be the case, I am of (sic) view that the said case ought to be distinguished from the present one. Mr. Akker was a Deputy sheriff yet in this case the Plaintiff is the Acting Chief responsible for a wide community and is also Senate President. The extent and effect of the publications was more scathing in the present matter than it was in the Martin Akker one. I have to consider as well the periods between the two and the devaluation in currency. Furtherstill I must consider that the publication of the offending material in the Martin Akker matter was not shown to be as sustained and serialized as this one was. This matter is also different when considering that the negative effect in the Akker matter was not shown as having been felt immediately and in reality as was the case herein where according to the Defendants’ own story it caused the Simelanes to enforce changes by allegedly or supposedly removing the Plaintiff from her position. [66] Having considered all the circumstances of the matter, its seriousness and its effect on the Plaintiff, I am convinced that damages in the sum of Five Hundred and Fifty Thousand Emalangeni (E550 000.00) will be an appropriate award to make and I accordingly award Plaintiff the said amount as damages together with interest at 9% per annum from date of judgment to date of payment as well as the costs of suit.” [68] Adv. Flynn has raised before us some arguments, principal of which is that, the amount awarded is too excessive and will have a chilling effect on the media; the matter was already in the public domain before the publication; the highest amount awarded in Swaziland in relation to such damages was the sum of E100,000 in the Akker case; the publication did not have much effect on the Respondent as she has retained her position as Senate President and Acting Chief of Kontshingila; the Appellants made every effort to get the Respondent’s side of the story but to no avail, therefore, they could not 43