Government acts on SLAPPs - but only in economic crime

So-called SLAPP cases - strategic litigation against public participation - will be defined in law for the first time under legislation unveiled by the government today. Amendments to the Economic Crime and Corporate Transparency Bill, currently at report stage in the House of Lords, will give judges new early dismissal powers against lawsuits designed purely to evade scrutiny and stifle freedom of speech, the government said. 

However critics pointed out that the new measures will relate only to cases connected with economic crime. Law Society president Lubna Shuja said: 'We understand why the government is implementing these measures. However, as only cases related to economic crime are covered, this means that some claimants may still use SLAPPs to stifle scrutiny.'

Under the legislation, judges would be able to classify as a SLAPP legal action taken to restrain a person’s freedom of speech if:

• the claimant’s behaviour has, or is intended to have, the effect of restraining the defendant’s exercise of the right to freedom of speech,

• the information that is or would be disclosed by the exercise of that right has to do with economic crime,

• that disclosure is or would be made for a purpose related to the public interest in combating economic crime, and

• any of the behaviour of the claimant in relation to the matters complained of in the claim is intended to cause the defendant any harm or inconvenience ’beyond that ordinarily encountered in the course of properly conducted litigation’.

Should a case reach court the early dismissal mechanism comprising of two tests will come into effect – whether a case is a SLAPP as defined by the bill, and whether the claim has reasonable chance of being successful. This will put the onus on the complainants to prove that their case has merit, rather than on the defendant, the government said. 

Announcing the measure, the lord chancellor, Alex Chalk KC MP, said: 'We are stamping out the brazen abuse of our legal system that has allowed wealthy individuals to silence investigators who are trying to expose their wrongdoing. These measures will protect the values of freedom of speech that underpin our democracy and help better protect reporters who are shining a light on their crimes.'

Campaigners for tougher moves against SLAPP litigation welcomed the amendment, which if brought into law would be the first anti-SLAPP measure in the UK. However Susan Coughtrie, director of the Foreign Policy Centre noted that the amendment related only to legal threats about reports of economic crime. While these account for 70% of SLAPP cases, this would not cover, for example, reports about Russia’s mercenary Wagner group.  

Jessica Ní Mhainín, head of policy and campaigns at Index on Censorship, described the announcement 'as a stepping stone rather than a final destination'.