The Supreme Court of Zambia has held in Moving Unit Video Television Limited T/a MUVI TV [SCZ Selected Judgment No 18 of 2019 that,

The law of reputation seeks to achieve satisfactory balance between two competing interests, namely the right of the individual to be afforded protection against harm to his reputation, on one hand, and that of members of the public to free speech and proper access to information, on the other hand.

Noting that it was crucial for there to exist a free press to keep the public informed, and that such press ought not to be stifled in this role by highly restrictive defamatory laws, the court has observed that the press is a powerful tool that ‘[i]f, and when such media publishes defamatory material, the end result is devastatingly harmful to the subject’s reputation. It could irreparably ruin a good name built over years.’ The Court noted that reportage according to the case of Roberts v Gable [2008] QB 502 was a defence to any suit relating to defamation. Regarding the defence of justification, the court cited with approval what is termed ‘the Reynold’s qualified privilege’ defence so named

after the decision in Reynolds v Times Newspaper [2001] 2 AC 127. It was observed that, ‘[…] while recognising the public interest defence, two essential elements ought to be established for the defence to be successfully raised […] namely (i) that the article as a whole must be in the public interest; and (ii) there must be responsible journalism.’ It follows therefore that any defence of justification on the basis of public interest would will fail where said defence fails to prove to the satisfaction of the court that it took into account the factors set out in the Reynolds case.