Press Freedom NGOs: Malta’s Anti-SLAPP Proposals Are Unambitious And Inefficient
Malta has the most SLAPP lawsuits per capita in the European Union. Article 19 Europe is urging the Committee of Experts on Media to “take further steps to fulfil its international human rights obligations and fully protect and promote a safe media environment in Malta”.
“We express our ongoing concern about the lack of transparency regarding the implementation of the recommendations of the Public Inquiry,” began a joined statement by Article 19 Europe, the Committee to Protect Journalists, the European Centre for Press and Media Freedom, the European Federation of Journalists and Reporters without Borders.
SLAPP suits – strategic lawsuits against public participation – are often used by powerful individuals seeking to censor, intimidate or silence critical voices.
As such, they can be highly effective for those seeking to quash criticism and avoid accountability – which is inherently anti-democratic.
If you’re interested in learning more about SLAPP suits, and how they have been weaponised across the world, you may be interested in watching this video.
This year, Malta fell to its lowest point in the World Press Freedom Index, and SLAPP suits continue to contribute to that perceived lack of journalistic freedom.
Over 300 weeks since the assassination of Daphne Caruana Galizia, these organisations remain concerned that Malta is not doing nearly enough to protect journalists
“The proposed amendments are limited to the law of defamation and libel. This narrow scope fails to provide the necessary protection of the right to public participation which should be the key feature of any efficient anti-SLAPP mechanism.”
“In addition, the vague definition of SLAPP defamation suits as “manifestly unfounded” would exclude lawsuits that bear hallmarks of SLAPPs but might not fall under this category.”
The organisations outlined recommendations they believe should be made to the Government:
- Introduce a standalone comprehensive anti-SLAPP law
- Revise the proposed definition of “manifestly unfounded”
- Introduce a mechanism for dismissal before the continued hearing and determination of the merits of the claim
- Introduce a provision that the court must stay the hearing and the determination of the merits of the claim while it is determining whether the claim is abusive
- Introduce clarification that where a defendant has applied for early dismissal, the claimant shall prove that the claim is not manifestly unfounded
- Clarify the nature of the damages for which a claimant may be found responsible and the extent of the penalties which may be imposed on a claimant.
- A foreign judgment should be identified as a SLAPP, and consequently rejected, for the same reasons as a domestic or intra-EU action.
- The proposal must provide the court of the defendant’s domicile with the power to assess whether third-country proceedings would have been considered abusive had their own law been applied
Do you think the government wants to protect Maltese press rights?
READ NEXT: 'No More Time To Waste': Six European Presidents - Including Malta's - Say Climate Crisis Has Arrived
