By Elaine Hua, Assistant Researcher at King’s Commercial Awareness Society
Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation are legal actions intended to intimidate, censor, or silence critics by burdening them with the cost of a legal defence. Recent developments show that such cases may result in disciplinary actions.
Understanding the topic
Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation (SLAPPs) are legal actions intended to intimidate, censor, or silence critics by burdening them with the cost of a legal defense. SLAPPs are typically brought by powerful individuals or organizations, such as corporations, against individuals or groups that speak out against them. These lawsuits often target people exercising their constitutional right to free speech and can negatively affect public debate and discourse.
In the UK, the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) recently investigated how law firms understand SLAPPs. In its report, it observed that while most firms and solicitors understand the risk of SLAPPs, libel and reputation management practice is concerning. This is particularly true for companies associated with Russia after the Ukranian invasion. Russian oligarchs exploit the strict libel laws to threaten journalists and authors who attempt to critise them. The SRA is probing 40 live cases relating to SLAPPs. The outcome of the probe and the disciplinary actions to be taken by the SRA will be very important for legal practitioners.
Impact
The impact of SLAPPs can be significant, not only for targeted individuals or groups but also for businesses and the legal industry.
For citizens, SLAPPs can be financially and emotionally devastating. They can bankrupt individuals and organisations and force them to give up their right to free speech to avoid legal action. The chilling effect of SLAPPs can also stifle public debate and discourse, limiting citizens’ access to information and freedom of expression.
For businesses, SLAPPs can be a double-edged sword. On the one hand, businesses can use SLAPPs to silence critics or competitors, but on the other hand, they can become targets of SLAPPs themselves. In some cases, SLAPPs can also damage a company’s reputation, especially if the public perceives the lawsuit as an attempt to silence criticism or avoid accountability.
Finally, the legal industry can also be impacted by SLAPPs. While it stays true that lawyers serve their client’s interests, they must also fulfill court requirements. After the SRA probe, solicitors need to consider further the limit between maximising clients’ interests and ensuring the public’s freedom of expression. After all, abiding by these rules is important for companies as involvement in the SLAPPs’ turmoil might negatively affect the company’s reputation. In addition, law firms could take a stance against SLAPPs and refuse to represent plaintiffs who might be using legal action to silence critics.
Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation can significantly impact individuals, businesses, and the legal industry. While the SRA had taken steps to protect citizens’ right to free speech, more must be done to address the growing threat of SLAPPs and ensure that justice is served fairly.