[75] Then, there is the fact that the proposition also loses sight of the case of
Sikelela Dlamini v The Editor of the Nation and Another (Supra), where
the High Court awarded the sum of E120,000.00 to the Plaintiff as damages.

[76] In that case, the Defendants had written some articles about the Plaintiff an
employee of the Government of Swaziland, employed as such as the Under
Secretary in the Ministry of Health and Social Welfare. In paragraph 10 of
his statement of claim, the Plaintiff alleged that the publications were
defamatory in that they were intended to mean and were understood to
mean that he is very corrupt, immoral, of reprehensive demeanor, not worthy
of public confidence, and wrongfully, unlawfully, furtively and clandestinely
abused his position to make personal economic gain. And this, by attempting
to influence the outcome of Tender No. 2 and thereafter, it was alleged that
the Plaintiff influenced non approval of the said tender, by the Drug
Advisory Committee and the Tender Board. Alternatively, the Plaintiff
knowingly and dishonestly attempted to award the said tender to a particular
bidder by attempting to sit in the Drug Advisory Committee and take charge
of the Committee’s task in the adjudication of tenders.

[77] Here again, the defamation was less pungent, in that the status of Mr.
Dlamini as Under Secretary in a Government ministry, is of less
protuberance than that of the Respondent.

The publication though

impinging on his dignity, however, dealt with his conduct and performance
under his portfolio as the said Under Secretary, as opposed to the case
instant, where the defamatory words were

a vicious attack on the

Respondent’s personal life and origins. Then, there is the fact that the award
was made 6 years ago in 2008. This of course takes into account the rate of
46

Select target paragraph3