On 28 April the so-called SLAPP proposal was published. This refers to strategic lawsuits that distort the public debate. The new instrument is thus aimed at protecting those who participate in it and who are subject to manifestly unfounded or abusive legal proceedings. SLAPPs are a form of legal warfare against freedom of expression, well known in practice.
International forensic science, especially Anglo-Saxon forensic science.

They are legal forms of intimidation in the form of unfounded or excessive lawsuits initiated by public bodies, companies or people in power against weaker parties - such as journalists, civil society organisations or the media.
The aim of these lawsuits is to silence the influential whistleblower, not so much through the outcome of the process, but through a financial cost that cannot be borne. The aim of these lawsuits is to silence the influential whistleblower, not so much through the outcome of the process, but through a financial cost that cannot be borne.

It may seem strange that, in the European Union, a geographical area with a high level of democracy and where the basis of judicial cooperation is based on mutual trust, it is necessary to regulate these protective measures in judicial proceedings, but it is an urgent and necessary issue.

The 2020 and especially the 2021 EU Rule of Law Report highlighted the pressures on the independent press in a number of countries. Member States.

The Commission has therefore considered the presentation of the proposal as a priority to the extent of omitting the supporting impact study, which is replaced by an informal study, on an exceptional basis.

The proposal will be a Directive and not a Regulation. It is well known that the area of civil justice is essentially made up of regulations, which ensure uniform application of the rules, but it is no less true that the directive technique, in which the greatest degree of harmonisation is desirable, is a negotiating advantage in difficult instruments, such as this one, when the starting point is integration into the national legal system of the Member State, which thus maintains greater legislative autonomy.

A system of costs and damages as well as penalties is designed.

SLAPP is a priority for the current Commission, although it will not be easy to negotiate. Both because of the direct involvement of certain Member States identified in the report, such as Hungary, Bulgaria, Romania, Croatia, and

Slovenia, as well as the intrinsic difficulty of the proposal. The future directive is divided into eight chapters, which aim at a civil - not criminal - procedural amendment in the Member States, aimed at providing courts with procedural tools against abusive claims. These measures would consist of the imposition of sureties on the plaintiff; the creation of procedures for early dismissal by an accelerated channel suspending the main proceedings, subject obviously to appeal, or the provision for reversal of the burden of proof.

It also provides for a system of orders for costs and damages, as well as penalties. Protection is extended to judgments handed down in third countries, for which it is provided that if the defendant is domiciled in a Member State, he may obtain compensation from European funds.

But, beyond the process, it essentially wants to raise social awareness and follow up on this problem, ensuring the availability of support for those facing SLAPP, with systematic treatment.

In my view, this initiative of the European Commission should be strongly supported, although it will require significant technical and negotiating work.

In particular, it will be essential to start from a correct identification of the manifestly unfounded or abusive claim, contextualising its relationship with social interest groups that create opinion.

Significantly among them is the press. Opinion-forming - public participation - affects issues of possible general interest such as the crisis in the separation of powers, the pursuit of self-interested bias in fake news, without the need for a new media, and the need for the media to be more open to the public.
The main causes of corruption are: electoral fraud; violations of environmental regulations; money laundering; and corruption.

The directive will need to define as clearly as possible the new procedural tools in order to achieve adequate protection measures, including by ensuring that a third party (usually an NGO) has standing in the proceedings.

The proposal is accompanied by a Commission Recommendation on the protection of journalists and human rights defenders engaged in public debate against overt legal proceedings.
unfounded or abusive ("strategic demands that distort the public debate").

Here, it can be seen, the reference is openly to journalists. Freedom of the press is a guarantor of democratic values and respect for human rights. That is why the European Union must be a champion of its defence.

See news in The Economist