It is impossible to consider the fairness of the results; the nature of the hearing accorded to Mr. Jeyaretnam; and the implications of these proceedings, without considering the long history of the multiple defamation actions brought against Mr. Jeyaretnam in the context of being a candidate for public office.  All of the different lawsuits leading up to these last two lawsuits against Mr. Jeyaretnam, and inclusive of them, involve public discussions by Mr. Jeyaretnam as a candidate for Parliament. The defamation damage awards against Mr. Jeyaretnam have been excessive and punitive. They resulted ultimately in the bankruptcy proceedings in the Krishnan case, and lead to his disqualification, on the hearing of that appeal, from sitting in parliament and from practising as a lawyer, on the grounds of his having been declared a bankrupt. It is the view of this observer that there has to be some leeway granted in law to political candidates in elections.  The trend in most common law jurisdictions is to allow a defence of qualified privilege so as to permit a political candidates to raise issues of concern to the public.  To raise such issues is a basic responsibility of candidates for public office and there seems to be no other way that opposition candidates can call to task members of the government.

In each and every common law country except for Singapore there is a defence of qualified privilege.  The trend in common law jurisdictions of allowing some room for opposition candidates to call into question concerns in an election have received the strongest support in the United States.  In other words, in a political debate context, an opposition member is entitled to say that he has some information that is of concern and there needs to be some response from the members of government.  Under Singapore law there appears to be no such defence.  The court will presume that the speaker intended to assert the truth of the matter being raised.  This creates a chill and leads to, as set out below, a concern with respect to freedom of expression.