O'NEILL FILES DEFAMATION PROCEEDINGS AGAINST KRAMMER OVER FACEBOOK POST

By Bryan Krammer 

This morning I received a phone call from Prime Minister Peter O'Neill's lawyers notifying me they had court documents to serve on me. I kindly asked what the proceedings relate to, they responded defamation proceedings on behalf of their client Peter O'Neill.

As you can imagine I couldn't help but smile - the first thought that came to mind was my articles are certainly drawing screams from the monkey in the tree.

Right now I'm unaware of the merits of O'Neill's case, however it will certainly be interesting. Unlike O'Neill I won't be running off to hide in Parliament and only too happy to make myself available to be served.

Defamation is an offence provided under Defamation Act. It is defined as an imputation (allegation) concerning a person which is likely injure their reputation, profession, trade or cause others to shun, avoid or despise him.

However just as the law defines defamation as an offence it also provides protection against it where the publication is considered fair comment, the truth or made in good faith.

For instance if you call someone corrupt and can prove on reasonable grounds they are, then you would be protected by the law.

Its no secret I have branded O'Neill corrupt and a liar both of which I'm confident of proving. If this is one of the grounds he intents to prosecute against me then I guess it's time to bring out the evidence (documentation and audio recordings).

The risk one takes for prosecuting someone for defamation is if allegations are criminal, in the public area they are mere allegations, however, once the matter is tried in court and allegations are proven to be true then the judgement maybe submitted as primary evidence in their criminal prosecution.

On the issue of fair comment - this applies to those who occupy public office insofar as their conduct or character in the discharge of their public functions.

In 2016 O'Neill filed a complaint against Michael Ambrose a tribesman from Pangia for publishing statements on social media threatening to kill him. Police charged Ambrose for Written Threat to Kill, an offence under Section 306 of Criminal Code. Penalty: Imprisonment for a term not exceeding seven years.

Soon after his arrest Ambrose's brother contacted me for assistance. While Ambrose admitted to police that he did in fact publish the statements I prepared his submission in defense of the charges.

At the committal hearing District Court Magistrate dismissed the charges on grounds there was no real evidence Ambrose was really capable of killing O'Neill and emphasizing that O'Neill occupied public office and therefore subject to public scrutiny.

I've lost count of the number of court proceedings O'Neil has initiated against me. Well can't blame the guy trying... ;)