Lee Hsien Loong v Leong Sze Hian [2021] SGHC 66 plaintiff’s character and suggest that the plaintiff was, at the very least, involved in serious and dishonest criminal activity (see also [29] above). Whether the Defendant has Substantially Published or Republished the Defamatory Words 32 There are two sub-issues that arise in relation to the question of whether or not there has been substantial publication or republication by the defendant of the defamatory words: (a) Whether the Post on Facebook amounts to publication of defamatory material; (b) Whether hyperlinking to the Article amounts to publication of defamatory material; Both questions may be answered in the affirmative on the instant facts. Publication 33 The plaintiff bases his claim on both the Post, and the Article that was linked in the Post. As explained above, the Article was accessible through the Post, by way of a hyperlink. 34 The defendant accepts that he is responsible for having published the Post, though he contends that there has not been any “substantial” publication as not many individuals accessed and read the Post.19 As for the Article, the defendant’s position is that he is not responsible for its publication because there is no evidence that anyone clicked on it as a result of his sharing the Post.20 19 DCS at [2(a)]. 20 DCS at [2(b)]. 18