Legislation aimed at curbing the use of strategic lawsuits against public participation, commonly known as Slapps, has been introduced in both houses of the UK Parliament. The private members' bills, presented by Conservative members within 24 hours of each other, are expected to attract cross-party support and are designed to protect whistleblowers, journalists, and victims of sexual assault from being silenced through costly legal action.
Government Support and Political Context
Labour ministers are understood to be supportive of the bills, following frustration within the Ministry of Justice that similar measures were not included in the king's speech. However, sources indicated that progress is at an early stage, given the political turmoil surrounding a potential leadership challenge to Keir Starmer. The Ministry of Justice is expected to offer advice on the drafting of the bills.
The Bills and Their Proponents
Tina Stowell, a former BBC communications chief and leader of the House of Lords under David Cameron, published a draft bill on Tuesday. The following day, John Whittingdale, the MP for Maldon and former Conservative culture secretary, presented his strategic litigation against public participation bill. Whittingdale stated that his bill, set to be debated in November, has support across parliament and from all sections of the media. He described Slapps as an abuse of the legal system, used by the rich and powerful to suppress legitimate investigative journalism and muzzle free expression.
Lady Stowell emphasized that the attack on free speech represented by Slapps is a stain on the legal system and a threat to a functioning democracy. She noted that British courts have long been used to hush up unethical behavior and corporate abuses.
Key Provisions of the Bills
Stowell's draft bill allows defendants facing libel suits or other legal actions to ask a judge to dismiss the case early in the process, before costs accumulate, if they can demonstrate that the case relates to a matter of public interest. Defendants whose cases are dismissed can also be awarded costs, and courts can impose penalties on claimants who deliberately prolong the process or cause delays.
Background and Need for Reform
The bills follow a long campaign for better protection from financially crippling lawsuits for those speaking up on issues of public interest. Claims that go all the way to trial can cost up to £1 million per party in legal fees, with the losing party paying the other side's costs. The Guardian and other media have highlighted how the wealthy and powerful, from oligarchs to corporations, have used the threat of legal action to silence those with fewer resources. In several high-profile cases, women reporting rape and sexual abuse have also been dragged to court after speaking out.
Political Support and International Context
Both Conservative and Labour leaders have supported reform. In 2023, the Conservatives introduced limited protections for those speaking up on economic crimes such as money laundering, but the legislation does not help those raising issues related to human rights. In October 2024, Keir Starmer promised action, describing abuse of courts by the rich and powerful as intolerable, but the government has yet to bring forward its own legislation.
Other countries already have anti-Slapp laws. In many US states, judges have broad powers to dismiss abusive cases. In the EU, a directive was introduced in 2024, but member states have been slow to implement it. The new EU law is limited in that it excludes criminal matters, but it allows EU citizens being sued abroad to challenge those targeting them in EU courts. Greenpeace has already tested this provision in the Netherlands in a case involving a US oil pipeline company.
Reactions from Advocacy Groups
Susan Coughtrie, co-chair of the UK Anti-Slapps Coalition, welcomed the bills, stating that there is now an opportunity to turn support into robust, accessible, and universal protections for everyone, ensuring justice is available to all, not just those who can afford it. She warned that left unaddressed, Slapps allow bad-faith actors to control and restrict the information available to the public, impacting our knowledge of the world around us.
