The EU’s new Anti-SLAPP Directive attempts to put an end to lawsuits aimed at silencing them through financial extermination. Protecting democracy and fighting misinformation will be protected from frivolous and abusive SLAPPs.
With 546 votes in favour, 47 against and 31 abstentions, the European Parliament approved the directive which aims to ensure that persons and organizations working on matters of public interest, such as fundamental rights, corruption complaints, the protection of democracy and the fight against misinformation, they will be protected from unfounded and abusive lawsuits.
The directive will enter into force 20 days after its publication in the EU’s official journal. From that date, member states will have two years to incorporate it into national law. The protection will apply to all cases of a cross-border nature. The Parliament and the Council had reached a relevant agreement on 30 November 2023.
Two laws
In order to protect victims more effectively, the new directive establishes:
- The dismissal of baseless cases at a preliminary stage and the possibility to ask the plaintiff to cover court costs, including for the legal representation of the defendant, as well as to pay compensation to the victim.
- If the defendant requests that the case be dismissed at a preliminary stage, it is up to the plaintiff to demonstrate that there are reasons to continue the proceedings. The court can also impose other sanctions on the plaintiffs.
“Threat to the rule of law”
After the vote, rapporteur Teemo Welken (Socialists, Germany) said:
“SLAPP suits are a threat to the rule of law and seriously undermine the fundamental rights of freedom of expression, information and association. It is a form of legal harassment and abuse of the judicial system, increasingly used by powerful individuals and organizations to avoid public scrutiny. EU courts should not be used in this way for personal gain. This directive will help combat SLAPPs by preventing people from using the courts to intimidate and prevent journalists and activists from releasing information and enforcing a form of self-censorship.”
