I'm not sure what you mean by "crime" as this is a civil case.
It does seem a bit odd, though.
I could accuse you (obviously invented) of breeding and eating newborn kittens and puppies for breakfast because, for some reason, I'd been led to this conclusion.
What would your defence be against this appalling accusation?
In Portugal, "
defamation" is a crime - Penal Code, artº 180º«
1- Quem, dirigindo-se a terceiro, imputar a outra pessoa, mesmo sob a forma de suspeita, um facto, ou formular sobre ela um juízo, ofensivos da sua honra ou consideração, ou reproduzir uma tal imputação ou juízo, é punido com pena de prisão até 6 meses ou com pena de multa até 240 dias. 1.Who, addressing a third, impute to another person, even in the form of suspicion, a fact, or makes a judgment about them, offending their honor or consideration, or reproduce such an imputation or judgment, is punishable with imprisonment for up to six months or a fine of up to 240 days.]
2- A conduta não é punível quando:
a) A imputação for feita para realizar interesses legítimos; e
b) O agente provar a verdade da mesma imputação ou tiver tido fundamento sério para, em boa fé, a reputar verdadeira.[2. Such conduct is not punishable when:
a) the imputation is made to prove legitimate interests; and
b) The agent proves the truthfulness of such imputation or if he/she has a serious fundament to, in good faith, repute such as truthful.]
3- Sem prejuízo do disposto nas alíneas b), c) e d) do n.º 2 do artigo 31.º deste Código, o disposto no número anterior não se aplica quando se tratar da imputação de facto relativo à intimidade da vida privada e familiar.
[3. Without prejudice of b), c) and d) in the article 31º, nº 2* of this Code, the disposition in the revious number does not apply when there is an imputation of fact to intimacy of the family and private life.]
4- A boa fé referida na alínea b) do n.º 2 exclui-se quando o agente não tiver cumprido o dever de informação, que as circunstâncias do caso impunham, sobre a verdade da imputação.[4. The good faith referred in b) of nº 2 is excluded when the agent did not accomplish the duty of information, that the circumstances of the case obligated, about the truth of the imputation] »
*NOTE: artº31º - causes precluding wrongfulness and guilt
2- Namely it is not illicit the act committed:
a) in self defense;
b) within the exercise of a right;
c) in the fulfillment of a duty imposed by law or by a legitimate authority order;
d) with the consent of the holder of the aggrieved interest
I hope I could contribute to clarify a little bit.
Number 1 above: "honor and consideration" about the person refers to the Constitutional Fundamental Rights of Personality.
That is what was on the basis for the banning of the book.
As we saw, such banning was dismissed because it was understood that such rights had not been harmed.
Now what we have is a request for compensation of alleged damages, just like a person suffering from a car accident would demand.
