MPs call for urgent universal anti-SLAPP legislation as UK government says it’s ‘taking steps’
MPs called for universally applicable and robust legislation to clamp down on Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation (SLAPPs) in a debate in Westminster on the first day back from recess.
SLAPPs are abusive legal threats and lawsuits filed by those with thin skins and thick wallets to silence critical speech. They can be targeted at journalists, whistleblowers, campaigners, academics, and more.
The Backbench Business Committee session on Tuesday (1 September) concluded with a motion recognising that SLAPPs pose a “critical threat” to press freedom, noting that existing anti-SLAPP provisions are "ineffective" and “insufficient”, and calling for the government to urgently introduce new legislation that “filters out abusive lawsuits swiftly and fairly”.
John McDonnell MP, NUJ parliamentary group secretary, said:
“SLAPPs stifle free speech and undermine the right of the general public to know information. There is a deterrence effect: they are a form of intimidation against telling the truth.
“The previous Prime Minister gave a commitment with regard to legislation; unfortunately, that was not in the King’s speech. Now is the time to pick up the pace.
"I am grateful to the [Courts and Legal Services] Minister for now offering briefings on how we can move forward, as well as for working on a cross-party basis."
McDonnell said that journalists "had been the main target of SLAPPs" with some incurring devastating legal costs "just to try to demonstrate that they have been writing truthful analyses."
He added that the Economic Crime and Corporate Transparency Act 2023 is inadequate in stopping SLAPPs, as it only applies to economic crime reportage, giving claimants the opportunity to find another matter on which to take action. That the judge has to consider the intent of the SLAPP filer and the intent of the defendant means the threshold is “too high”. He cited the example of journalist Dan Neidle, who won a libel case after criticising a tax avoidance scheme but was left with £146,000 in legal fees.
McDonnell added:
"The NUJ is part of the Anti-SLAPP Coalition. The proposals put forward include: clear, 10-point criteria to identify SLAPPs; a higher merits threshold for likely success at trial; and a filter mechanism for swift disposal of actions that clearly seek to gag individual journalists and others. We welcome the government’s engagement now - hopefully including with the NUJ over these coming weeks - so that we can get this legislation on the statute book as rapidly as possible and protect freedom of speech."
Other MPs also called on the government to urgently introduce comprehensive anti-SLAPP measures. Dr Kieran Mullan, Conservative MP for Bexhill and Battle, said:
“The Justice Secretary has said that legislation will be brought forward, but the King’s Speech has been and gone, so what is the government’s plan? If the answer today is only warm words, I think the 111 peers who signed the cross-party letter, the editors of The Times, The Sun and The Guardian, the National Union of Journalists, the UK Anti-SLAPP Coalition and every Member who has spoken in this debate are perhaps entitled to a little something more.”
MPs gave several detailed examples, including some involving their own constituents, of where SLAPPs have been used to stifle free speech and reporting in the public interest. Alex Sobel, Labour MP for Leeds Central and Headingley, said:
“Many of Britain’s biggest national scandals only came to light because determined journalists, courageous whistleblowers and persistent campaigners refused to be intimidated, but SLAPPs have often been present. SLAPPs delayed reporting on the Horizon Post Office scandal, maternity scandals in teaching hospitals - such as those in Oxford and in my constituency in Leeds - and the Grenfell tower tragedy.
“Think about the scandals we have never discovered because someone successfully silenced those asking the questions. That is why the issue is about far more than protecting journalists; it is about protecting the public’s right to know.”
Sarah Sackman, courts and legal services minister, said the government welcomes calls for universal anti-SLAPP legislation, adding “we have begun to take the stepping stones towards that universal framework.”
In June, John Whittingdale MP introduced an anti-SLAPP Private Members’ Bill that would establish an early dismissal mechanism, which is scheduled for its second reading later this year.
Sackman said:
“[Whittingdale] and I are in constant contact. We are working together, because there is much common ground. We see that there can be a good way forward that gets the results that we need on the statute book, and that strikes a coherent balance between the right to access the courts - that must be maintained, so that people can protect their reputation and their right to privacy - and freedom of expression for journalists and individuals [...] I am confident that we can get a carefully balanced and proportionate approach that the government can support.”
She added that the government would need to “look again” at the enforcement powers of the Solicitors Regulation Authority and consider “whether it has the tools needed to charge fines and place disciplinary sanctions on those lawyers who let down the reputation of the profession.”