### Defamation Ordinance 《誹謗條例》

12. Defence in proceeding for printing extract from report, etc.
It shall be lawful in any civil or criminal proceeding to be commenced for printing or broadcasting any extract from or abstract of any such report to give in evidence, in a civil case in support of any allegation in defence, and in a criminal case under the general issue, the report, and to show that the extract or abstract was published bona fide and without malice; and if such is the opinion of the jury, a verdict of not guilty shall be entered for the defendant.
(Amended 50 of 1911; 62 of 1911 Schedule; 33 of 1961 s. 6)[cf. 1840 c. 9 s. 3 U.K.]

13. Privilege of newspaper report of proceedings in court
(1) A fair and accurate report in any newspaper or broadcast of proceedings publicly heard before any court shall, if published contemporaneously with such proceedings, be privileged:
Provided that nothing in this section shall authorize the publication of any blasphemous or indecent matter. (9 of 1901 s. 3 incorporated. Amended 50 of 1911; 62 of 1911 Schedule; 33 of 1961 s. 7) [cf. 1888 c. 64 s. 3 U.K.]
(2) Any report in a newspaper, and any broadcast report, of committal proceedings in a case where publication is permitted by virtue only of section 87A(5) and (6) of the Magistrates Ordinance (Cap. 227), published as soon as practicable after it is so permitted, shall be treated for the purposes of subsection (1) as having been published or broadcast contemporaneously with the committal proceedings. (Added 6 of 1971 s. 6) [cf. 1967 c. 80 s. 5 U.K.]

### Defamation Ordinance 《誹謗條例》

14. Qualified privilege of newspapers
(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, the publication in a newspaper or the broadcasting of any such report or other matter as is mentioned in the Schedule shall be privileged unless the publication is proved to be made with malice.
(2) In an action for libel in respect of the publication of any such report or matter as is mentioned in Part II of the Schedule, the provisions of this section shall not be a defence if it is proved that the defendant has been requested by the plaintiff to publish in the manner in which the original publication was made a reasonable letter or statement by way of explanation or contradiction, and has refused or neglected to do so, or has done so in a manner not adequate or not reasonable having regard to all the circumstances.
(3) Nothing in this section shall be construed as protecting the publication of any matter the publication of which is prohibited by law, or of any matter which is not of public concern and the publication of which is not for the public benefit.
(Replaced 33 of 1961 s. 8)[cf. 1952 c. 66 s. 7 U.K.]

15. Inquiry by magistrate as to libel being true, etc.
A magistrate, on the hearing of a charge against a proprietor, publisher, or editor, or any person responsible for the publication of a newspaper, for a libel published therein, may receive evidence as to the matter charged in the libel being true, and as to the report being fair and accurate and published without malice, and as to the publication being for the public benefit, and as to any matter which, under this or any other Ordinance or otherwise, might be given in evidence by way of defence by the person charged on his trial on information, and if the magistrate is of opinion that there is a strong or probable presumption that the jury on the trial would acquit the person charged he may dismiss the case.

### Defamation Ordinance 《誹謗條例》

16. Provision as to summary conviction for libel
If a magistrate, on the hearing of such a charge is of opinion that, though the person charged is shown to have been guilty, the libel was of a trivial character, and that the offence may be adequately punished by virtue of the powers of this section, he shall cause the charge to be reduced into writing and read to the person charged, and then address a question to him to the following effect—“Do you desire to be tried by a jury or do you consent to the case being dealt with summarily?” and if such person assents to the case being dealt with summarily, the magistrate may summarily convict him and adjudge him to pay a fine of $250.
(Amended 50 of 1911; 51 of 1911; 62 of 1911 Schedule; 63 of 1911 Schedule) [cf. 1881 c. 60 s. 5 U.K.]

17. Evidence of other damages recovered by plaintiff
In any action for libel or slander the defendant may give evidence in mitigation of damages that the plaintiff has recovered damages, or has brought actions for damages, for libel or slander in respect of the publication of words to the same effect as the words on which the action is founded, or has received or agreed to receive compensation in respect of any such publication.
(Replaced 33 of 1961 s. 9)[cf. 1952 c. 66 s. 12 U.K.]

18. Order of judge required for prosecution of newspaper proprietor, etc.
(1) No criminal prosecution shall be commenced against any proprietor, publisher, editor, or any person responsible for the publication of a newspaper for any libel published therein without the order of a judge in chambers being first had and obtained. (Amended 51 of 1911; 63 of 1911 Schedule)
(2) The application for such order shall be made on notice to the accused person, who shall have an opportunity of being heard against such application.
(9 of 1901 s. 8 incorporated)[cf. 1888 c. 64 s. 8 U.K.]