由此 - 27 - A B trade. It acknowledges that “hawala” may be used for both innocent as well as illegal purposes. C D E 98. But Section IX §19, through juxtaposition, implies that ARY or ARY Group companies serve criminal or terrorist clients. The 3rd A B C D E sentence states that criminals and terrorists are the “main patrons” of F G “hawala”. Out of the blue, this is followed by a sentence to the effect that ARY is the biggest gold dealer in Dubai “with an estimated 45% share of F G the local gold wholesale business, which in 2003 was believed to be in the H I order of $5.87 billion”. There would be little purpose in introducing such sentence unless the reader was meant to infer that ARY or ARY companies H I provided “hawala” services to criminals and terrorists. J J K 99. It is true that §19 does not expressly state that ARY or ARY K companies wittingly (as opposed to unwittingly) assist illegal operations L M through “hawala”. But it is difficult to resist the conclusion, reading the Article as a whole, that the reader is meant to draw the conclusion that L M ARY and the ARY companies are complicit in the purported criminal N N activities. O O 100. P I think that the meaning pleaded in SOC §8(j) are made out in §19. In my view, the paragraph is defamatory. Q Q 101. R S P There is simply no evidence before the Court to support the R allegations raised against ARY and the ARY Group in Section IX. A responsible editor should have asked to see at least some material justifying S the allegations. In the absence of any such reliable material, I do not think T T that the editor could have allowed Section IX §19 to be published. U U V V