11Trial for defamatory libel

11 Trial for defamatory libel S. 11(1) amended by Nos 57/1989 s. 3(Sch. item 223.2), 68/2009 s. 97(Sch. item 137.3). (1) On the trial of any charge for a defamatory libel, the accused having pleaded such plea as is hereinafter mentioned, the truth of the matters charged may be inquired into, but shall not amount to a defence unless it was for the public benefit that the said matters charged should be published; and to entitle the accused to give evidence of the truth of such matters charged as a defence to such charge it shall be necessary for the accused in pleading to the said charge to allege the truth of the said matters charged in the same manner as in pleading a justification to an action of defamation, and further to allege that it was for the public benefit that the said matters charged should be published and the particular fact or facts by reason whereof it was for the public benefit that the said matters charged should be published; to which plea the prosecutor shall be at liberty to reply generally denying the whole thereof; and if after such plea the accused is convicted on such charge it shall be competent to the court in pronouncing sentence to consider whether the guilt of the accused is aggravated or mitigated by the said plea or by the evidence given to prove or disprove the same: Provided always that the truth of the matters charged in the alleged libel complained of by such charge shall in no case be inquired into without such plea of justification: Provided also that in addition to such plea it shall be competent to the accused to plead a plea of not guilty: Provided also that nothing in this Act contained shall take away or prejudice any defence under the plea of not guilty which it is now competent to the accused to make under such plea to any charge for defamatory words or libel. S. 11(2) amended by Nos 57/1989 s. 3(Sch. item 223.2), 68/2009 s. 97(Sch. item 137.3). (2) Whensoever upon the trial of any charge for the publication of a libel under the plea of not guilty evidence has been given which establishes a presumptive case of publication against the accused by the act of any other person by his authority, it shall be competent to such accused to prove that such publication was made without his authority consent or knowledge and that the said publication did not arise from want of due care or caution on his part. S. 12 repealed by No. 75/2005 s. 49(Sch. 4 item 3.2). No. 3807 s. 12. S. 13 amended by Nos 57/1989 s. 3(Sch. item 223.3), 35/1996 s. 453(Sch. 1 item 90.1), 68/2009 s. 97(Sch. item 137.4).