SINGAPORE — Noting that damages in defamation cases must correspond with the standing of the defamer, a High Court judge today (Dec 17) ordered blogger Roy Ngerng to pay Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong S$150,000 for alleging that the latter had criminally misappropriated Central Provident Fund monies.

While past defamation cases involving Prime Ministers have attracted damages in excess of S$300,000, Justice Lee Seiu Kin said a “substantial reduction” in this case was warranted, given the blogger’s “comparatively low standing”. In response to media queries, Mr Lee’s press secretary said the Prime Minister accepts the damages awarded.

Mr Ngerng had earlier been found guilty of defaming Mr Lee, and in a three-day hearing in July to assess damages, Mr Lee’s lawyer Davinder Singh made the case for “substantial damages” to be awarded. The case stands out for the “depth and intensity” of Mr Ngerng’s malice towards Mr Lee and his resolve to damage 

Mr Lee’s reputation, thus warranting a “very high award of damages”, Mr Singh had said.

Although the judge agreed that Mr Ngerng had acted out of malice and had made one of the “gravest (accusations) that can be made against any individual”, he ruled that the blogger was a “defendant of modest standing”.

“The words of a dishevelled tramp in a street corner would be far less capable of causing damage than that of the CEO of a multinational company,” said the judge, in his written grounds released yesterday. The amount comprised S$100,000 in general damages and S$50,000 in aggravated damages, with the judge noting that Mr Ngerng had aggravated the defamation by his conduct after receiving notice of legal action — he had published the Letter of Demand that contained his defamatory remarks.

In 2005, Singapore Democratic Party (SDP) chief Chee Soon Juan was ordered to pay then-Senior Minister Goh Chok Tong S$300,000 for alleging that Mr Goh had misled Parliament in relation to a S$17 billion loan made to Indonesia. In 2009, Prime Minister Lee was awarded S$330,000 over defamatory articles published in SDP’s newspaper implying that the Government was in the know about the National Kidney Foundation scandal, but had covered it up.

But in those cases, “none of the awards ... involves a defendant of modest standing such as the defendant in the present case”, said Justice Lee.

He felt that the popularity of Mr Ngerng’s blog The Heart Truths and his “portrayal of himself as the voice of truth” were no evidence of his perceived credibility or the influence he had over Singaporeans.

“Notwithstanding his attempts to fashion himself as an investigative journalist of sorts, the defendant has never sought to conceal the fact he is merely an ordinary citizen writing on his personal blog; there was no pretence that he had any information that others were not privy to that would have lent credence to his allegations,” he said. “I certainly do not think that the popularity of the blog (which averaged around 355 views per day in 2013) and the manner in which his views were presented were sufficient to elevate his credibility to that of a leading opposition politician, for instance, or to imbue his words with the gravitas they would have had, had they been in a publication with an international circulation.”

Justice Lee also dismissed Mr Ngerng’s defence that a large award would have a “chilling effect” on freedom of expression in Singapore. “There is no benefit in permitting the free dissemination of false assertions of fact that destroy a person’s reputation ... There are limits to unrestricted communication in matters of public interest holding primacy in a democratic society,” he said.