Next event: Draft final act 2024/04/11 more...
- Decision by Parliament, 1st reading 2024/02/27
- Approval in committee of the text agreed at 1st reading interinstitutional negotiations 2024/01/24
- Results of vote in Parliament 2023/07/11
- Decision by Parliament, 1st reading 2023/07/11
- Matter referred back to the committee responsible 2023/07/11
- Debate in Parliament 2023/07/10
- Committee report tabled for plenary, 1st reading 2023/06/29
- Vote in committee, 1st reading 2023/06/27
- Committee opinion 2023/06/07
- Committee opinion 2023/05/23
- KOULOGLOU Stelios (GUE/NGL) appointed as rapporteur in CULT 2023/05/02
- Amendments tabled in committee 2023/04/05
Progress: Awaiting Council's 1st reading position
Role | Committee | Rapporteur | Shadows |
---|---|---|---|
Lead | JURI | WÖLKEN Tiemo ( S&D) | ADAMOWICZ Magdalena ( EPP), CICUREL Ilana ( Renew), TOUSSAINT Marie ( Verts/ALE), LEBRETON Gilles ( ID), BUXADÉ VILLALBA Jorge ( ECR), AUBRY Manon ( GUE/NGL) |
Committee Opinion | CULT | KOULOGLOU Stelios ( GUE/NGL) | Asim ADEMOV ( PPE), Sylvie GUILLAUME ( S&D), Irena JOVEVA ( RE), Viola VON CRAMON-TAUBADEL ( Verts/ALE), Andrey SLABAKOV ( ECR) |
Committee Opinion | LIBE | STRUGARIU Ramona ( Renew) | Clare DALY ( GUE/NGL), Nicolaus FEST ( ID), Diana RIBA I GINER ( Verts/ALE), Magdalena ADAMOWICZ ( PPE), Cristian TERHEŞ ( ECR), Katarina BARLEY ( S&D) |
Committee Opinion | FEMM |
Lead committee dossier:
Legal Basis:
RoP 57, TFEU 081-p2
Legal Basis:
RoP 57, TFEU 081-p2Subjects
Events
The European Parliament adopted by 546 votes to 47, with 31 abstentions, a legislative resolution on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on protecting persons who engage in public participation from manifestly unfounded or abusive court proceedings (“Strategic lawsuits against public participation”).
The European Parliament's position adopted at first reading under the ordinary legislative procedure amends the Commission's proposal as follows:
Subject matter and scope
The purpose of this Directive is to eliminate obstacles to the proper functioning of civil proceedings, while providing protection for natural and legal persons who engage in public participation on matters of public interest, including journalists, publishers, media organisations, whistleblowers and human rights defenders, as well as civil society organisations, NGOs, trade unions, artists, researchers and academics, against court proceedings initiated against them to deter them from public participation.
This Directive provides safeguards against manifestly unfounded claims or abusive court proceedings in civil matters with cross-border implications brought against natural and legal persons on account of their engagement in public participation.
The protection will apply to all cross-border cases except when both the defendant and claimant are from the same EU country as the court or when the case is only relevant to one Member State.
Minimum requirements
Member States may introduce or maintain provisions that are more favourable to protect persons engaged in public participation against manifestly unfounded claims or abusive court proceedings against public participation in civil matters, including national provisions that establish more effective procedural safeguards relating to the right to freedom of expression and information.
Common rules on procedural safeguards
Where legal proceedings are brought against natural or legal persons on the grounds of their participation in the public debate, such persons should be able to request: (a) security for the estimated costs of the proceedings, which may include the costs of legal representation incurred by the defendant as well as, where provided for under national law, damages; (b) early dismissal of manifestly unfounded legal claims at the earliest possible stage of the proceedings; (c) remedies in response to abusive legal proceedings which distort the public debate.
The amended text stated that Member States should ensure that applications may also be treated in an accelerated manner , where possible, in accordance with national law, taking into account the circumstances of the case, the right to an effective remedy and the right to a fair trial.
Burden of proof and substantiation of claims
The burden of proving that the claim is well founded rests on the claimant who brings the action. Where a defendant has applied for early dismissal, it should be for the claimant to substantiate the claim in order to enable the court to assess whether it is not manifestly unfounded.
Award of costs
Member States should ensure that a claimant who has brought abusive court proceedings against public participation can be ordered to bear all types of costs of the proceedings that can be awarded under national law, including the full costs of legal representation incurred by the defendant unless such costs are excessive.
Where national law does not guarantee the award in full of the costs of legal representation beyond what is set out in statutory fee tables, Member States should ensure that such costs are fully covered, unless they are excessive, by other means available under national law.
Penalties or other equally effective appropriate measures
Member States should ensure that courts or tribunals seised of abusive court proceedings against public participation may impose effective, proportionate and dissuasive penalties or other equally effective appropriate measures, including the payment of compensation for damage or the publication of the court decision, where provided for in national law, on the party who brought those proceedings.
Jurisdiction for actions related to third-country proceedings
Member States should ensure that, where abusive court proceedings against public participation have been brought by a claimant domiciled outside the Union in a court or tribunal of a third-country against a natural or legal person domiciled in a Member State, that person may seek, in the courts or tribunals of the place where that person is domiciled, compensation for the damage and the costs incurred in connection with the proceedings before the court or tribunal of the third-country.
Information and transparency
EU governments should also make sure that potential victims of abusive lawsuits can access information in a single place on procedural safeguards and remedies, including legal aid and financial and psychological support.
Member states should ensure legal aid is provided in cross-border civil proceedings. They should also publish all final judgments in SLAPP (strategic lawsuits against public participation) cases and gather detailed data about them.
The European Parliament adopted by 498 votes to 33, with 105 abstentions, amendments to the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on protecting persons who engage in public participation from manifestly unfounded or abusive court proceedings (“Strategic lawsuits against public participation”).
The matter was referred back to the committee responsible for inter-institutional negotiations.
Subject matter and scope
Members specified that the Directive provides a set of minimum standards of protection and safeguards against manifestly unfounded or abusive court proceedings in civil matters, as well as the threats thereof, with cross-border implications brought against natural and legal persons engaging in public participation.
The scope of the proposed Directive should apply to matters of a civil or commercial nature having cross-border implications, including interim and precautionary measures, counteractions or other particular types of remedies available under other instruments, whatever the nature of the court or tribunal. It should not extend, in particular, to revenue, customs or administrative matters or the liability of the State for acts and omissions in the exercise of State authority.
Definitions
Members clarified the definition of ‘ public participation ’ to mean any statement or activity by a natural or legal person expressed or carried out in the exercise of the right to freedom of expression and information, academic freedom, or freedom of assembly and association on a matter of public interest. This includes complaints, petitions, administrative or judicial claims, the participation in public hearings, the creation, exhibition, advertisement or other promotion of journalistic, political, scientific, academic, artistic, satirical communications, publications or work.
Matters of public interest are those that affect the public in areas such as:
- fundamental rights, including gender equality, media freedom and consumer and labour rights, as well as public health, safety, the environment or climate;
- activities of a person or entity in the public eye or of public interest, including governmental officials and private entities;
- allegations of corruption, fraud, embezzlement, money laundering, extortion, coercion, sexual harassment and gender-based violence, or other forms of intimidation, or any other criminal or administrative offence, including environmental crime;
- activities aimed to protect the values enshrined in Article 2 TEU, the principle of non-interference in democratic processes, and to provide or facilitate public access to information with a view to fighting disinformation;
- academic, scientific, research and artistic activities.
Assistance to natural or legal persons engaging in public participation
Member States should ensure that natural or legal persons engaging in public participation have access, as appropriate, to support measures, in particular the following: (a) comprehensive and independent information and advice which is easily accessible to the public and free of charge on procedures and remedies available, on protection against intimidation, harassment or threats of legal action, and on their rights; and (b) legal aid, legal counselling or other legal assistance; (c) financial assistance and support measures, including psychological support, for those targeted by abusive court proceedings against public participation.
Guarantees
In the context of legal proceedings against public participation, the court or tribunal seized has the power to require the claimant to provide security for costs of the proceedings , including the full costs of legal representation incurred by the defendant and damages, if it considers such security appropriate.
Member States should take the necessary measures to ensure that a natural or legal person who has suffered harm as a result of an abusive court proceedings against public participation is able to claim and to obtain full compensation for that harm, covering material or non-material harm, including reputational harm , without the need to initiate separate court proceedings to that end.
Member States should ensure that courts or tribunals imposing penalties take due account of: (i) the economic situation of the claimant; (ii) the nature and number of the elements indicating an abuse identified.
Jurisdiction for defamation claims
A new article has been included stating that in defamation claims or other claims based on civil or commercial law which may constitute a claim under this Directive, the domicile of the defendant should be considered to be the sole forum , having due regard to cases where the victims of defamation are natural persons. In claims regarding a publication as an act of public participation, the applicable law should be considered to be the law of the place to which that publication is directed.
One-stop shop
Members included a new article establishing a ‘one-stop shop’ comprising dedicated national networks of specialised lawyers, legal practitioners and psychologists, which targets of SLAPPs can contact, and through which they can receive guidance and easy access to information on, and protection against SLAPPs, including regarding legal aid, financial and psychological support.
Training of practitioners
Members proposed that, with due respect for the independence of the legal profession, Member States should recommend that those responsible for the training of lawyers make available both general and specialist training to increase the awareness of strategic lawsuits against public participation and the procedural safeguards against them provided for in this Directive.
Cooperation and coordination of services
Member States should take appropriate action to facilitate cooperation between Member States to improve the access of those targeted by manifestly unfounded or abusive court proceedings against public participation to information on procedural safeguards provided for in this Directive and under national law. Such cooperation should be aimed at least at: (a) the exchange of current practices; and (b) the provision of assistance to European networks working on matters directly relevant to those targeted by manifestly unfounded or abusive court proceedings against public participation.
Publicly accessible national register
To ensure that the public can become aware of court decisions, Member States should establish a publicly accessible national register of relevant court decisions falling within the scope of this directive, in accordance with Union and national rules on the protection of personal data. The Commission should establish a publicly accessible Union register on the basis of the information from the registers of the Member States concerning relevant court decisions falling within the scope of this Directive, in accordance with Union rules on the protection of personal data.
The Committee on Legal Affairs adopted the report by Tiemo WÖLKEN (S&D, DE) on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on protecting persons who engage in public participation from manifestly unfounded or abusive court proceedings (“Strategic lawsuits against public participation”).
The committee responsible recommended that the European Parliament's position adopted at first reading under the ordinary legislative procedure should amend the proposal as follows:
Scope
The scope of the proposed Directive should apply to matters of a civil or commercial nature having cross-border implications, including interim and precautionary measures, counteractions or other particular types of remedies available under other instruments, whatever the nature of the court or tribunal. It should not extend, in particular, to revenue, customs or administrative matters or the liability of the State for acts and omissions in the exercise of State authority.
Definitions
Members clarified the definition of ‘public participation’ to mean any statement or activity by a natural or legal person expressed or carried out in the exercise of the right to freedom of expression and information, academic freedom, or freedom of assembly and association, and preparatory, supporting or assisting action directly linked thereto, on a matter of public interest. This includes complaints, petitions, administrative or judicial claims, the participation in public hearings, the creation, exhibition, advertisement or other promotion of journalistic, political, scientific, academic, artistic, satirical communications, publications or work.
Assistance to natural or legal persons engaging in public participation
Member States should ensure that natural or legal persons engaging in public participation have access, as appropriate, to support measures, in particular the following: (a) comprehensive and independent information and advice which is easily accessible to the public and free of charge
on procedures and remedies available, on protection against intimidation, harassment or threats of legal action, and on their rights; and (b) legal aid, legal counselling or other legal assistance; (c) financial assistance and support measures, including psychological support, for those targeted by abusive court proceedings against public participation.
Penalties
Member States should ensure that courts or tribunals imposing penalties take due account of: (i) the economic situation of the claimant; (ii) the nature and number of the elements indicating an abuse identified.
Jurisdiction for defamation claims
A new article has been included stating that in defamation claims or other claims based on civil or commercial law which may constitute a claim under this Directive, the domicile of the defendant should be considered to be the sole forum, having due regard to cases where the victims of defamation are natural persons.
One-stop shop
The report included a new article establishing a ‘one-stop shop’ comprising dedicated national networks of specialised lawyers, legal practitioners and psychologists, which targets of SLAPPs can contact, and through which they can receive guidance and easy access to information on, and protection against SLAPPs, including regarding legal aid, financial and psychological support.
Training of practitioners
To foster prevention of the initiation of SLAPPs and protection of targeted natural or legal persons, it is crucial to promote relevant information, awareness-raising, campaigns, education and training, including on their rights and protection mechanisms.
Members proposed that, with due respect for the independence of the legal profession, Member States should recommend that those responsible for the training of lawyers make available both general and specialist training to increase the awareness of strategic lawsuits against public participation and the procedural safeguards against them provided for in this Directive.
Training should also be provided to legal professionals in order to increase awareness of abusive court proceedings and be able to detect them at a very early stage.
Cooperation and coordination of services
Member States should take appropriate action to facilitate cooperation between Member States to improve the access of those targeted by manifestly unfounded or abusive court proceedings against public participation to information on procedural safeguards provided for in this Directive and under national law. Such cooperation should be aimed at least at: (a) the exchange of current practices; and (b) the provision of assistance to European networks working on matters directly relevant to those targeted by manifestly unfounded or abusive court proceedings against public participation.
Publicly accessible national register
To ensure that the public can become aware of court decisions, Member States should establish a publicly accessible national register of relevant court decisions falling within the scope of this directive, in accordance with Union and national rules on the protection of personal data. The Commission should establish a publicly accessible Union register on the basis of the information from the registers of the Member States concerning relevant court decisions falling within the scope of this Directive, in accordance with Union rules on the protection of personal data.
PURPOSE: provide protection to natural and legal persons who engage in public participation on matters of public interest, in particular journalists and human rights defenders, against court proceedings, which are initiated against them to deter them from public participation (commonly referred to as strategic lawsuits against public participation or ‘SLAPPs’).
PROPOSED ACT: Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council.
ROLE OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT: the European Parliament decides in accordance with the ordinary legislative procedure and on an equal footing with the Council.
BACKGROUND: strategic lawsuits against public participation or ‘SLAPPs’ are a particularly harmful form of harassment and intimidation used against those who work to protect the public interest.
They are unfounded or exaggerated legal proceedings usually initiated by powerful individuals, pressure groups, companies and state bodies against parties who express criticism or communicate messages that are disturbing to the plaintiffs on a matter of public interest. Unlike regular proceedings, SLAPP suits are not brought with the aim of exercising the right of access to justice and obtaining a successful outcome or redress. Rather, the aim is to intimidate defendants and drain their resources . The aim is to achieve a chilling effect, silencing defendants and deterring them from continuing their work.
Typical targets of SLAPPs are journalists and human rights defenders . This extends beyond individual persons to media and publishing houses and civil society organisations, such as those involved in environmental activism. Other persons engaged in public participation such as researchers and academics may also be targeted.
SLAPP-initiating entities and individuals can base their claims on various grounds. The allegations often relate to defamation, but they also relate to breaches of other rules or rights (e.g. data protection or privacy laws). These are often combined with damages/tort claims or at times injunctions (prohibiting or at least delaying publication).
Journalists have an essential role in facilitating public debate and in imparting information, opinions and ideas. Investigative journalists play a key role in combating organised crime, corruption and extremism. A robust system of safeguards is needed to enable them to fulfil their crucial role as watchdogs on matters of legitimate public interest. Human rights defenders should be able to participate actively in public life and make their voice heard on policy matters and in decision-making processes without fear of intimidation.
The prevalence of SLAPPs has been identified as a matter of serious concern in some Member States in the context of the 2020 and 2021 Rule of Law Reports. Many SLAPPs occur in domestic context and do not have cross-border implications. However, SLAPPs often have a cross ‑ border nature and where cross-border implications exist, they add an extra layer of complexity and costs, with even more adverse consequences for defendants.
CONTENT: the proposed Directive provides safeguards against manifestly unfounded or abusive legal proceedings in civil matters having cross-border implications against natural and legal persons, in particular journalists and human rights defenders, on account of their participation in public debate. It applies to civil and commercial matters with cross-border implications, irrespective of the nature of the jurisdiction.
The main elements of the proposal are as follows:
Early dismissal of manifestly unfounded court proceedings
Member States should empower courts to adopt accelerated procedures to dismiss, in whole or in part, court proceedings which distort the public debate as manifestly unfounded. If the defendant has applied for an early dismissal, the burden of proof that the claim is not manifestly unfounded would lie with the claimant.
Remedies against abusive court proceedings
Member States should take the necessary measures (i) to ensure that a claimant who has brought abusive court proceedings against public participation can be ordered to bear all the costs of the proceedings, including the full costs of legal representation incurred by the defendant, unless such costs are excessive; (ii) to ensure that a natural or legal person who has suffered harm as a result of abusive court proceedings against public participation is able to claim and to obtain full compensation for that harm.
Courts dealing with abusive legal proceedings that distort the public debate would be able to impose effective, proportionate and dissuasive sanctions on the party that initiated such proceedings.
Protection against decisions third-country judgements
Member States should refuse to recognise a third-country judgement against a person domiciled in a Member State if the proceedings are found to be manifestly unfounded or abusive under the law of that Member State.
Furthermore, where abusive court proceedings against public participation have been brought against a natural or legal person domiciled in a Member State in a court or tribunal of a third country, that person can seek compensation of the damages and the costs incurred in connection with the proceedings before the court or tribunal of the third country, irrespective of the domicile of the claimant in the proceedings in the third country.
Documents
- Draft final act: 00088/2023/LEX
- Decision by Parliament, 1st reading: T9-0085/2024
- Results of vote in Parliament: Results of vote in Parliament
- Decision by Parliament, 1st reading: T9-0264/2023
- Debate in Parliament: Debate in Parliament
- Committee report tabled for plenary, 1st reading: A9-0223/2023
- Committee opinion: PE742.481
- Committee opinion: PE745.244
- Amendments tabled in committee: PE746.688
- Committee draft report: PE745.170
- Contribution: COM(2022)0177
- Economic and Social Committee: opinion, report: CES3173/2022
- Contribution: COM(2022)0177
- Document attached to the procedure: EUR-Lex
- Document attached to the procedure: SWD(2022)0117
- Legislative proposal published: COM(2022)0177
- Legislative proposal published: EUR-Lex
- Document attached to the procedure: EUR-Lex SWD(2022)0117
- Economic and Social Committee: opinion, report: CES3173/2022
- Committee draft report: PE745.170
- Amendments tabled in committee: PE746.688
- Committee opinion: PE745.244
- Committee opinion: PE742.481
- Draft final act: 00088/2023/LEX
- Contribution: COM(2022)0177
- Contribution: COM(2022)0177
Activities
- David CASA
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Sylvie GUILLAUME
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Othmar KARAS
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Gilles LEBRETON
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Juan Fernando LÓPEZ AGUILAR
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Antonius MANDERS
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Marc TARABELLA
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Tiemo WÖLKEN
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Tatjana ŽDANOKA
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Clare DALY
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Manon AUBRY
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Saskia BRICMONT
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Irena JOVEVA
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Hannah NEUMANN
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Diana RIBA I GINER
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Ramona STRUGARIU
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Mick WALLACE
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Isabel WISELER-LIMA
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Magdalena ADAMOWICZ
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Ibán GARCÍA DEL BLANCO
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Sabrina PIGNEDOLI
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Cristian TERHEŞ
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Katarina BARLEY
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Łukasz KOHUT
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Ilana CICUREL
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Cyrus ENGERER
Plenary Speeches (0)
- Ernő SCHALLER-BAROSS
Plenary Speeches (0)
Amendments | Dossier |
162 |
2022/0117(COD)
2023/03/09
CULT
162 amendments...
Amendment 100 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 11 (11) Court proceedings against public participation may have an adverse impact on the credibility and reputation of journalists and human rights defenders and exhaust their financial and other resources. Because of such proceedings, the publication of information on a matter of public interest may be delayed or altogether avoided. The length of procedures and the financial pressure may have a chilling effect on journalists and human rights defenders. The existence of such practices may therefore have a deterrent effect on their work by contributing to self-censorship in anticipation of possible future court proceedings, which leads to the impoverishment of public debate to the detriment of society as a whole. Furthermore, such instances may also create precedents that ultimately lead to hampering public participation, spread of disinformation and lack of trust among the Union’s citizens. In addition to procedural safeguards, training for journalists and lawyers defending journalists in such cases can be a powerful support instrument and countermeasure against SLAPPs.
Amendment 101 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 11 (11) Court proceedings against public participation may have an adverse impact on the credibility and reputation of journalists and human rights defenders and exhaust their financial and other resources. Because of such proceedings, the publication of information on a matter of public interest may be delayed or altogether avoided
Amendment 102 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 11 (11) Court proceedings against public participation may have an adverse impact on the credibility and reputation of
Amendment 103 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 13 (13) The safeguards provided in this Directive should apply to any natural or legal person on account of their engagement in public participation.
Amendment 104 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 14 a (new) (14 a) Defamation and especially criminal defamation is one of the legal instruments most typically abused for the purpose of SLAPPs (1a). A more human- rights approach should be applied in member states to decriminalize defamation, or at minimum address abusive use of criminal defamation in court proceedings and employ any possible ways to ensure that criminal defamation is included in the scope of this Directive towards the highest possible protection of defendants. _________________ 1a https://commission.europa.eu/system/files/ 2022-04/slapp_comparative_study_0.pdf
Amendment 105 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 14 b (new) (14 b) Given that most SLAPPs are on criminal cases, the scope of this Directive has to be extended to criminal procedures, even if at a later stage.
Amendment 106 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 16 (16) Public participation should mean any statement or activity by a natural or legal person expressed or carried out in exercise of the right to freedom of expression and information on a matter of public interest, such as the creation, exhibition, advertisement or other promotion of journalistic content, news and current affairs, political, scientific, academic, artistic, commentary or satirical communications, publications or works, and any preparatory activities directly linked thereto. It can also include activities related to the exercise of the right to freedom of association and peaceful assembly, such as the organisation of or participation to lobbying activities, demonstrations and protests or activities resulting from the exercise of the right to good administration and the right to an effective remedy, such as the filing of complaints, petitions, administrative and judicial claims and participation in public hearings. Public participation should also include preparatory, supporting or assisting activities that have a direct and inherent link to the statement or activity in question and that are targeted to stifle public participation. In addition, it can cover other activities meant to inform or influence public opinion or to further action by the public, including activities by any private or public entity in relation to an issue of public interest, such as the organisation of or participation to research, surveys, campaigns or any other collective actions.
Amendment 107 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 16 (16) Public participation should mean
Amendment 108 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 18 (18) The notion of a matter of public interest should include also quality, safety or other relevant aspects of goods, products
Amendment 109 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 18 (18) The notion of a matter of public interest should include also quality, safety or other relevant aspects of goods, products or services, including the conditions under which these are produced or provided, where such matters are relevant to public health, safety, the environment, climate or enjoyment of fundamental rights. A purely individual dispute between a consumer and a manufacturer or a service provider concerning a good, product or service should be covered only when the matter contains an element of public interest, for instance concerning a product or service which fails to comply with environmental or safety standards, labour rights, consumer rights or human rights, including the principle of non discrimination.
Amendment 110 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 18 (18) The notion of a matter of public interest should include also quality, safety or other relevant aspects of goods, products or services where such matters are relevant to public health, safety, the environment
Amendment 111 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 19 (19) Activities of a p
Amendment 112 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 20 (20)
Amendment 113 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 20 (20) Abusive court proceedings typically involve litigation tactics used in bad faith such as delaying proceedings, causing disproportionate costs to the defendant in the proceedings or forum shopping. These tactics are used by the claimant for other purposes than gaining access to justice. Such tactics are often, although not always, combined with various forms of intimidation, harassment or threats. In this context, attention should also be paid to gender-based harassment as a particularly vicious indicator/form of abuse.
Amendment 114 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 20 (20) Abusive court proceedings typically involve litigation tactics used in bad faith such as exaggerated or excessive damage claims, requesting disproportionate prior restraint measures, delaying proceedings, causing disproportionate costs to the defendant in the proceedings or forum shopping. These tactics are used by the claimant for other purposes than gaining access to justice. Such tactics are often, although not always, combined with various forms of intimidation, harassment or threats.
Amendment 115 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 21 (21) A cross-border dimension of SLAPPs adds to the complexity and challenges faced by defendants, as they need to deal with proceedings in other jurisdictions, sometimes in multiple jurisdictions at the same time. This, in turn, results in additional costs and burdens to the victims of SLAPPs with the intention to exhaust and silent them with even more adverse consequences.
Amendment 116 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 22 (22) A matter should be considered to have cross-border implications unless both parties are domiciled in the same Member State as the court seised. Even where both parties are domiciled in the same Member State as the court seised, a matter should be considered to have cross-border implications in two other types of situations. The first situation is where the specific act of public participation concerning a matter of public interest at stake is relevant to more than one Member State. That includes for instance statements or activities on matters which the public of more than one Member State may legitimately take an interest in, and therefore are or may become of relevance to more than one Member State, such as the enjoyment or abuse of rights or freedoms under EU law, including in the area of non-discrimination, gender equality and protection from violence against women, online and offline public participation acts in events organised by Union institutions, such as appearances in public hearings, or statements or activities on matters that are of specific relevance to more than one Member State, such as cross-border pollution or allegations of money laundering with potential cross- border involvement. The second situation where a matter should be considered to have cross-border implications is when the claimant or associated entities have initiated concurrent or previous court proceedings against the same or associated defendants in another Member State. These two types of situations take into consideration the specific context of SLAPPs.
Amendment 117 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 22 (22) A matter should be considered to have cross-border implications
Amendment 118 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 22 (22) A matter should be considered to have cross-border implications unless both parties are domiciled in the same Member State as the court seised. Even where both parties are domiciled in the same Member State as the court seised, a matter should be considered to have cross-border implications in two other types of situations. The first situation is where the specific act of public participation concerning a matter of public interest at stake is relevant to more than one Member State
Amendment 119 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 22 (22) A matter should be considered to have cross-border implications unless both parties are domiciled in the same Member State as the court seised. Even where both parties are domiciled in the same Member State as the court seised, a matter should be considered to have cross-border implications in two other types of situations. The first situation is where the specific act of public participation concerning a matter of public interest at stake is relevant to more than one Member State or accessible, including online, to more than one Member State. That includes for instance public participation in events organised by Union institutions, such as appearances in public hearings, or statements or activities including social media campaigns and online media coverage on matters that are of specific relevance to more than one Member State, such as cross-border pollution or allegations of money laundering with potential cross-
Amendment 120 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 23 (23) Defendants should be able to apply
Amendment 121 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 23 a (new) (23 a) Bearing in mind that victims of ongoing and closed SLAPP cases may be subjected to financial burden, psychological pressure and other types of threats and intimidation, Member States should develop and oversee the implementation of support programmes, including a comprehensive range of necessary support measures, such as legal, financial, psychological and practical ones. There should also be a proper State reaction to the threats to the security and physical integrity of victims. Such support programmes should be developed respecting the specificity of the claim, the matter of public interest in question and of the specific situation of the victim.
Amendment 122 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 24 a (new) (24 a) The very broad range of SLAPPs targets calls for more resources, coordination, protection, networking, mapping, financial support and advocacy which should be achieved at the EU level.
Amendment 123 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 24 a (new) (24 a) Entities that are involved in defending the rights of persons engaging in public participation shall have the possibility to be part of the proceedings, in support of the defendants.
Amendment 124 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 26 (26) To provide the defendant with an additional safeguard, there should be a possibility to grant him or her a security to cover procedural costs and/or damages, when the court considers that even if the claim is not manifestly unfounded, there are elements indicating an abuse of procedure and the prospects for success in the main proceedings are low. A security does not entail a judgement on the merits but serves as a precautionary measure
Amendment 125 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 26 (26) To provide the defendant with an additional safeguard, there should be a possibility to grant him or her a security to cover
Amendment 126 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 26 (26) To provide the defendant with an additional safeguard, there should be a possibility to grant
Amendment 127 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 27 (27) A stay of the proceedings, when an application for early dismissal has been filed, ensures that procedural activity is suspended, hence reducing the procedural costs of the defendant. Such a stay in proceedings must not be applied in bad faith in order to delay proceedings, thus denying the claimant effective ramedy.
Amendment 128 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 29 (29) To ensure high expediency in the accelerated procedure on an application for early dismissal, Member States may set time limits for the holding of hearings or for the court to take a decision. They may a
Amendment 129 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 30 (30) If a defendant has applied for early dismissal,
Amendment 130 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 30 (30) If a defendant has applied for early dismissal, it should be for the claimant in the main proceedings to prove in the accelerated procedure that the claim is not
Amendment 131 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 30 (30) If a defendant has applied for early dismissal, it should be for the claimant in the main proceedings to prove in the accelerated procedure that the claim is not
Amendment 132 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 31 (31) Costs should include all costs of the proceedings, including the full costs of legal representation incurred by the defendant unless such costs are excessive. Costs of legal representation exceeding amounts laid down in statutory fee tables should not be considered as excessive per se. Where the domestic law does not guarantee the compensation of costs for legal representation beyond statutory fee tables, the court should be enabled to indemnify costs not encompassed in statutory fee tables through the award of damages. Full compensation of damages should include both material and immaterial damages, such as physical and psychological harm.
Amendment 133 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 31 (31) Costs should include all costs of the proceedings, including the full costs of legal representation incurred by the defendant
Amendment 134 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 31 (31) Costs should include all costs of the proceedings, including the full costs of legal representation incurred by the defendant unless such costs are excessive. Costs of legal representation exceeding amounts laid down in statutory fee tables should not be considered as excessive
Amendment 135 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 31 (31) Costs should include all reasonably incurred costs of the proceedings, including the full costs of legal representation incurred by the defendant unless such costs are excessive. Costs of legal representation exceeding amounts laid down in statutory fee tables should not be considered as excessive per se. Full compensation of damages should
Amendment 136 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 33 (33) In the cross-border context, it is also important to recognize the threat of SLAPPs from third countries targeting journalists, human rights defenders and other persons engaged in public participation who are domiciled in the European Union. They may involve excessive damages awarded against EU journalists
Amendment 137 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 33 (33) In the cross-border context, it is
Amendment 138 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 33 (33) In the cross-border context, it is also important to recognize the threat of SLAPPs from third countries targeting journalists, human rights defenders and other persons engaged in public participation who are domiciled in the European Union. They may involve excessive damages awarded against EU journalists, human rights defenders and others. Court proceedings in third-countries are more complex and costly for the targets. To protect democracy and freedom of expression and information in the European Union and to avoid that the safeguards provided by this Directive are undermined by recourse to court proceedings in other jurisdictions, it is important to provide protection also against
Amendment 139 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 34 Amendment 140 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 34 a (new) (34 a) In the cross-border context, it is also vital that the EU conducts adequate data collections across member states in order to develop the best use of standards and raise awareness on SLAPP cases. Member states should collect data on SLAPP cases such as the number of unfounded or abusive court proceedings against public participation, the number of dismissed cases, and figures on cross- border elements, description of legal basis and figures about acts of public to monitor and report on such cases across the EU, while taking arrangements to ensure protections of the rights of those involved, in particular the victims of these court procedures.
Amendment 141 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 34 a (new) (34 a) For the efficiency, relevance and effectiveness of this directive, active and enhanced monitoring of SLAPP cases shall be ensured, and adequate support and resources to these monitoring efforts shall be guaranteed. The monitoring process shall include judicial authorities, professional organisations, non- governmental organisations, human rights defenders, journalists and other stakeholders involved or affected by the SLAPPs.
Amendment 142 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 36 (36) This Directive is complementary to the Commission recommendation on protecting journalists and human rights defenders who engage in public participation from
Amendment 143 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 39 a (new) (39 a) Following the adoption of this Directive, awareness rising campaigns as well as specific training should be deployed in order to inform at best all the potential targets and legal professionals of the specificities of SLAPPs cases, help them identify if they are facing SLAPPs and inform them of potential recourse and appeals. More generally, adequate resources need to be invested to effectively inform citizens of their civic rights to public participation, and the sharing of best practices at EU level should be encouraged.
Amendment 144 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 39 b (new) (39 b) Given the profound impact of these SLAPPs cases on the potential target's lives and mental health issues that can occur, Member states should set up specific psychological support to accompany them.
Amendment 145 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 39 c (new) (39 c) SLAPP cases targeting media outlets may aim to cause their closing down. A specific tool should be envisaged in order to ensure the economic sustainability of media organisations facing such cases and their ability to resist such attacks, as part of securing a framework favourable to media pluralism.
Amendment 146 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 39 d (new) Amendment 147 #
Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 This Directive provides safeguards against
Amendment 148 #
Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 This Directive provides safeguards against
Amendment 149 #
Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 This Directive provides safeguards against manifestly unfounded or abusive court proceedings in civil matters with cross- border implications brought against natural and legal persons, in
Amendment 150 #
Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 This Directive provides safeguards against manifestly unfounded or abusive court proceedings in civil matters, with cross- border implications, brought against natural and legal persons,
Amendment 151 #
Proposal for a directive Article 2 – paragraph 1 This Directive shall apply to
Amendment 152 #
Proposal for a directive Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 1 1. ‘public participation’ means any statement or activity, physical or digital, by a natural or legal person expressed or carried out in the exercise of the right to freedom of expression and information on a matter of public interest,
Amendment 153 #
Proposal for a directive Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 1 1. ‘public participation’ means any statement or activity including online by a natural or legal person expressed or carried out in the exercise of the right to freedom of expression and information on a matter of public interest,
Amendment 154 #
Proposal for a directive Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 1 1. ‘public participation’ means any statement or activity by a natural or legal person expressed or carried out in the exercise of rights such as the right to freedom of expression and information, academic freedom, freedom of association and assembly on a matter of public interest, and preparatory, supporting or assisting action directly linked thereto. This includes complaints, petitions, demonstrations, administrative or judicial claims and participation in public hearings;
Amendment 155 #
Proposal for a directive Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 1 1. ‘public participation’ means any statement or activity by a natural or legal person expressed or carried out in the exercise of the right to freedom of expression and information on a matter of public interest,
Amendment 156 #
Proposal for a directive Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – introductory part 2. ‘matter of public interest’ means any
Amendment 157 #
Proposal for a directive Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point a (a) public health, safety, the environment, climate, consumer or labour rights or enjoyment of fundamental rights including right of information and expression, media freedom and pluralism;
Amendment 158 #
Proposal for a directive Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point a (a) public health, safety, the environment, climate or enjoyment of fundamental rights including non- discrimination, gender equality and protection from violence against women;
Amendment 159 #
Proposal for a directive Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point a (a) fundamental rights, public health, public safety, the environment
Amendment 160 #
Proposal for a directive Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point a (a) public health, safety, the environment
Amendment 161 #
Proposal for a directive Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point b Amendment 162 #
Proposal for a directive Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point d (d) allegations of c
Amendment 163 #
Proposal for a directive Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point d (d) allegations of corruption, fraud, abuse of power or criminality;
Amendment 164 #
Proposal for a directive Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point e (e) scientific and research activities and activities aimed to fight disinformation;
Amendment 165 #
Proposal for a directive Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point e a (new) (e a) abuse or misuse of power by state or EU institutions and organs including systemic and state violence;
Amendment 166 #
3. ‘abusive court proceedings against public participation’ mean court proceedings brought in relation to public participation that are alleged to be fully or partially unfounded
Amendment 167 #
Proposal for a directive Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – introductory part 3. ‘abusive court proceedings against public participation’ mean court proceedings
Amendment 168 #
Proposal for a directive Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point a (a) the disproportionate, vexatious, frivolous, excessive or unreasonable nature of the claim or part thereof;
Amendment 169 #
Proposal for a directive Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point a a (new) (a a) parties' imbalances in bargaining powers in terms of financial and legal resources;
Amendment 170 #
Proposal for a directive Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point b a (new) (b a) the litigation tactics deployed by the claimant, including as regards the choice of jurisdiction and the use of dilatory tactics;
Amendment 171 #
Proposal for a directive Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point c (c) a legitimate suspicion or proof that intimidation, harassment or threats on the part of the claimant or his or her representatives took part in relation to the subject of the claim.
Amendment 172 #
Proposal for a directive Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point c a (new) (c a) litigation tactics used in bad faith to restrict the freedom of expression and information with the intent to silence or restrain public scrutiny on a matter of legitimate public interest.
Amendment 173 #
Proposal for a directive Article 3 a (new) Article 3 a Serious Harm A statement is not defamatory unless its publication has caused or is likely to cause serious harm to the reputation of the claimant. For the purposes of this section, harm to the reputation of a body that trades for profit is not “serious harm” unless it has caused or is likely to cause the body serious financial loss.
Amendment 174 #
Proposal for a directive Article 4 – paragraph 1 1. For the purposes of this Directive, a matter is considered to have cross-border implications
Amendment 175 #
Proposal for a directive Article 4 – paragraph 2 Amendment 176 #
Proposal for a directive Article 4 – paragraph 2 – point a Amendment 177 #
Proposal for a directive Article 4 – paragraph 2 – point a (a) the act of public participation concerning a matter of public interest against which court proceedings are initiated is relevant to more than one Member State, either due to the cross- border nature or dimension of the act itself, or due to the interest which the public in different Member States may take in the matter concerned by the act; or
Amendment 178 #
Proposal for a directive Article 4 – paragraph 2 – point b Amendment 179 #
Proposal for a directive Article 5 – paragraph 1 – introductory part 1. Member States shall ensure that when court proceedings are brought against natural or legal persons on account of their engagement in public participation on matters of public interest , those persons can apply for:
Amendment 180 #
Proposal for a directive Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point b (b) early dismissal of
Amendment 181 #
Proposal for a directive Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point b (b) early dismissal of
Amendment 182 #
Proposal for a directive Article 5 – paragraph 3 3. Member States
Amendment 183 #
Proposal for a directive Article 5 – paragraph 3 3. Member States
Amendment 184 #
Proposal for a directive Article 7 – paragraph 1 Member States shall take the necessary measures to ensure that a court or tribunal seised of court proceedings against public participation may accept that non- governmental organisations safeguarding
Amendment 185 #
Proposal for a directive Article 7 – paragraph 1 Member States shall take the necessary measures to ensure that a court or tribunal seised of court proceedings against public participation may accept that
Amendment 186 #
Proposal for a directive Article 7 – paragraph 1 Member States shall take the necessary measures to ensure that a court or tribunal seised of court proceedings against public participation may accept that
Amendment 187 #
Proposal for a directive Article 7 – paragraph 1 Member States shall take the necessary measures to ensure that a court or tribunal seised of court proceedings against public participation may accept that
Amendment 188 #
Proposal for a directive Article 7 – paragraph 1 Member States shall take the necessary measures to ensure that a court or tribunal seised of court proceedings against public participation may accept that non- governmental organisations safeguarding or promoting the rights of persons engaging in public participation may take part in those proceedings,
Amendment 189 #
Proposal for a directive Article 8 – paragraph 1 Member states shall ensure that in court proceedings against public participation, the court or tribunal seised has the power to require the claimant to provide security for procedural costs, or for procedural costs and damages, if it considers such security appropriate in view of presence of elements indicating abusive court proceedings. Adverse costs risk is one factor that may allow a party with an unmeritorious claim to stifle the free speech rights of a less pecunious opponent. Therefore, member states shall ensure robust costs protection mechanisms, both at the initial stage, and then more formally through costs protection where cases do proceed.
Amendment 190 #
Proposal for a directive Article 8 – paragraph 1 Member states shall ensure that in court proceedings against public participation, the court or tribunal seised has the power to require the claimant to provide security for
Amendment 191 #
Proposal for a directive Chapter III – title III Early dismissal of
Amendment 192 #
Proposal for a directive Chapter III – title III Early dismissal of
Amendment 193 #
Proposal for a directive Article 9 – paragraph 1 1. Member States shall empower courts and tribunals to adopt a
Amendment 194 #
Proposal for a directive Article 9 – paragraph 1 1. Member States shall empower courts and tribunals to adopt an early decision to dismiss, in full or in part, court proceedings against public participation as manifestly unfounded when there are indications that the claim was brought for an abusive, malicious or dishonest purpose against public participation.
Amendment 195 #
1. Member States shall empower courts and tribunals to adopt an early decision to dismiss, in full or in part, court proceedings against public participation as
Amendment 196 #
Proposal for a directive Article 9 – paragraph 1 1. Member States shall empower courts and tribunals to adopt an early decision to dismiss, in full or in part, court proceedings against public participation as
Amendment 197 #
Proposal for a directive Article 9 – paragraph 2 2. Member States
Amendment 198 #
Proposal for a directive Article 11 Amendment 199 #
Proposal for a directive Article 12 – paragraph 1 Member States shall ensure that where a defendant has applied for early dismissal,
Amendment 200 #
Proposal for a directive Article 12 – paragraph 1 Member States shall ensure that where a defendant has applied for early dismissal, it
Amendment 201 #
Proposal for a directive Article 12 – paragraph 1 Member States shall ensure that where a defendant has applied for early dismissal, it shall be for the claimant to prove that the claim is not
Amendment 202 #
Proposal for a directive Article 13 – paragraph 1 Member States shall ensure that a decision
Amendment 203 #
Proposal for a directive Article 14 – paragraph 1 Member States shall take the necessary
Amendment 204 #
Proposal for a directive Article 14 – paragraph 1 Member States shall take the necessary measures to ensure that a claimant who has brought abusive court proceedings against public participation can be ordered to bear all the reasonably incurred costs of the proceedings, including the full costs of legal representation incurred by the defendant, unless such costs are excessive.
Amendment 205 #
Proposal for a directive Article 14 – paragraph 1 Member States shall take the necessary measures to ensure that a claimant who has brought abusive court proceedings against public participation
Amendment 206 #
Proposal for a directive Article 14 – paragraph 1 Member States shall take the necessary measures to ensure that a claimant who has brought abusive court proceedings against public participation
Amendment 207 #
Proposal for a directive Article 14 – paragraph 1 a (new) Member States should foresee that national courts are able to indemnify those costs that are not encompassed in statutory fee tables, such as costs for legal representation beyond statutory fee tables through compensation of damages pursuant to Article 15
Amendment 208 #
Proposal for a directive Article 15 – paragraph 1 Member States shall take the necessary measures to ensure that a natural or legal person who has suffered harm as a result of an abusive court proceedings against public participation is able to claim and to obtain full compensation for that harm. To ensure that accessing such compensation is not a burden for the victims and to avoid perpetuating the negative impact of the SLAPPs on the victims, this compensation shouldn't require the filing of a separate formal claim by the defendant and should come as an automatic feature of the proceedings.
Amendment 209 #
Proposal for a directive Article 15 – paragraph 1 Member States shall take the necessary measures to ensure that a natural or legal person who has suffered harm as a result of an abusive court proceedings against public participation is able to claim and to obtain full compensation for that harm, irrelevant of whether it may be physical, psychological or reputational.
Amendment 210 #
Proposal for a directive Article 15 – paragraph 1 Member States shall take the necessary measures to ensure that a natural or legal person who has suffered harm as a result of an abusive court proceedings against public participation is able to claim and to obtain full compensation for that harm, including any loss of income, reputation or opportunity.
Amendment 211 #
Proposal for a directive Article 16 – paragraph 1 a (new) Deontological rules for legal professionals Member States should report on a regular and timely manner on the measures they undertake to ensure that the deontological rules that govern the conduct of legal professionals and the disciplinary sanctions for violation of those rules consider and include appropriate measures to discourage abusive lawsuits against public participation, with all due respect for the independence of the legal professions and in close cooperation with relevant stakeholders including professional associations and other social partners, as indicated in the Recommendation (EU) 2022/758. This may include encouraging self-regulation by associations of legal professionals and/or, when this is consistent with national law and in full respect of the independence of the legal profession, take initiatives for legislation or co-regulation.
Amendment 212 #
Proposal for a directive Article 16 – paragraph 1 a (new) This Directive will provide for an EU SLAPPs Coordinator which will channel funding to financially support victims of SLAPPs, either past or pending cases, create networks and hubs of sharing best practices, monitor for all SLAPPs cases at real time and regularly map SLAPPs situation in Europe, facilitate access to individual and independent support and to the relevant European Courts, issue reccomendations, raise public awareness and participate as a European Observer in SLAPPs trials.
Amendment 213 #
Proposal for a directive Article 16 – paragraph 1 b (new) Training for legal professionals With all due respect for the independence of the legal professions and in application of the Recommendation, Member States should report on a regular and timely basis on the specific training they may foresee for legal professionals, be they lawyers or judges to raise awareness on these specific cases and procedures attached as set in this Directive and as implemented at national level
Amendment 214 #
Proposal for a directive Article 16 – paragraph 1 b (new) Commission and member states shall explore how to include criminal procedures under the remit of this Directive.
Amendment 215 #
Proposal for a directive Article 16 – paragraph 1 c (new) With due regard to the financial impacts of the SLAPP cases, notably in the media sector, a European fund for support to victims including financial and legal support should be implemented.
Amendment 216 #
Proposal for a directive Article 16 – paragraph 1 d (new) Member States shall provide that courts or tribunals seized of proceedings against news media organisations or professionals shall keep the steps, duration and costs of the proceedings reasonable and predictable.
Amendment 217 #
Proposal for a directive Article 16 – paragraph 1 e (new) Member states should provide mental health support to victims of SLAPP cases.
Amendment 218 #
Proposal for a directive Article 17 – paragraph 1 Member States shall ensure that the recognition and enforcement of a third- country judgment in court proceedings on account of public participation by natural or legal person domiciled in a Member State is refused as manifestly contrary to public policy (ordre public) if those proceedings would have been considered
Amendment 219 #
Proposal for a directive Article 20 – paragraph 1 Member States shall provide the Commission with all relevant information regarding the application of this Directive by [
Amendment 220 #
Proposal for a directive Article 21 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 Member States shall bring into force the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with this Directive by [
Amendment 221 #
Proposal for a directive Article 21 – paragraph 2 – point 1 (new) (1) This Directive shall apply to existing and ongoing charges against public participation.
Amendment 222 #
Proposal for a directive Article 21 – paragraph 2 a (new) 2 a. Member States shall support awareness raising campaigns on unfounded or abusive court proceedings against public participation organised among others by national entities, including National Human Rights Institutions and civil society organizations.
Amendment 223 #
Proposal for a directive Article 21 – paragraph 2 b (new) Amendment 62 #
Proposal for a directive Title 1 Proposal for aDIRECTIVE OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCILon protecting persons
Amendment 63 #
Proposal for a directive Title 1 Proposal for aDIRECTIVE OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCILon protecting persons who engage in public participation from
Amendment 64 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 2 (2) Article 10(3) of the Treaty on European Union states that every Union
Amendment 65 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 2 (2) Article 10(3) of the Treaty on European Union states that every Union citizen has the right to participate in the democratic life of the Union. The Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (the ‘Charter’) provides, inter alia, for the rights to respect for private and family life (Article 7), the protection of personal data (Article 8), freedom of expression and information, which includes respect for the freedom and pluralism of the media (Article 11), freedom of assembly and of association ( Article 12) and to an effective remedy and to a fair trial (Article 47).
Amendment 66 #
(2) Article 10(3) of the Treaty on European Union states that every Union citizen has the right to participate in the democratic life of the Union. The Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (the ‘Charter’) provides, inter alia, for the rights to respect for private and family life (Article 7), the protection of personal data (Article 8), freedom of expression and information, which includes respect for the freedom and pluralism of the media (Article 11), freedom of assembly and of association and to an effective remedy and to a fair trial (Article 47).
Amendment 67 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 3 (3) The right to freedom of expression and information as set forth in Article 11 of the Charter includes the right to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers. The exercise of these freedoms is necessary in a democratic society for the protections of the reputation or rights of others, for preventing disclosure of information received in confidence or for maintaining the authority and impartiality of the judiciary as set forth in the Article 11 of the Charter. Article 11 of the Charter should be given the meaning and scope of the correspondent Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights (“ECHR”) on the right to freedom of expression and to hold your own opinons without government interference as interpreted by the European Court of Human Rights (“ECtHR”). This includes the right to express your views aloud in any given form.
Amendment 68 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 3 (3) The right to freedom of expression and information as set forth in Article 11 of the Charter includes the right to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers. Article 11 of the Charter should be given the meaning and scope of the correspondent Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights (“ECHR”) on the right to freedom of expression as interpreted by the European Court of Human Rights (“ECtHR”). The fundamental freedom of art and science as set forth in Article 13 of the Charter recalls that arts and scientific research shall be free of constraints and that academic feedom is repsected.
Amendment 69 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 4 (4) The purpose of this Directive is to
Amendment 70 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 4 (4) The purpose of this Directive is to provide protection to natural and legal persons who engage in public participation on matters of public interest, in particular journalists and human rights defenders, such as civil society, non-governmental organisations and trade unions, activists, citizen journalists, researchers, academics, artists, whistleblowers and publishers of journalistic and artistic works against court proceedings, which are initiated against them to deter them from public participation (commonly referred to as strategic lawsuits against public participation or ‘SLAPPs’).
Amendment 71 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 4 (4) The purpose of this Directive is to provide protection to natural and legal persons who engage in public participation on matters of public interest including online, in particular journalists
Amendment 72 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 4 (4) The purpose of this Directive is to provide protection to natural and legal persons who engage in public participation on matters of public interest, in particular journalists and human rights defenders, including to whistleblowers of all kind, such as civil society, non-governmental organisations, researchers, academics, students, artists, against court proceedings, which are
Amendment 73 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 4 (4) The purpose of this Directive is to provide protection to natural and legal persons who engage in public participation on matters of public interest, in particular journalists and human rights defenders, against court proceedings, which are initiated against them to deter them from public participation (commonly referred to as strategic lawsuits against public participation or ‘SLAPPs’), while safeguarding the right to an effective remedy and to a fair trial against such natural and legal persons.
Amendment 74 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 4 a (new) (4 a) It should be also noted that public participation may not always be conducted in good faith. The dissemination of fake news or disinformation should not be protected under this Directive. Bearing in mind the continuously evolving digital environment and the possibilities to spread, copy and influence the public opinion, the concept of public participation on matters of public interest should be assessed on a case-by-case basis. In case where there is a legitimate concern by the court that the defendant may be part of a targeted hybrid attack or a disinformation campaign, the safeguards laid down in the current Directive should not be applicable.
Amendment 75 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 5 (5) An independent, impartial, professional and responsible media is a cornerstone of democracy. There is a pressing need to maintain the independence of the media from political and economic pressure, such as the one used through SLAPPs. Journalists play an important role in facilitating public debate and in the imparting and reception of information, opinions and ideas. It is essential that they conduct their journalistic activities in good faith and that they are afforded the necessary space to contribute to an open, free and fair debate and to counter disinformation, information manipulation and interference. Journalists should be able to conduct their activities effectively to ensure that citizens have access to a plurality of views in European democracies.
Amendment 76 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 5 (5) Journalists play an important role in facilitating public debate and in the imparting and reception of information, opinions and ideas. It is essential that they are afforded the necessary space to contribute to an open, free and fair debate and to counter disinformation, information manipulation and interference. Journalists should be able to conduct their activities effectively to ensure that citizens have access to a plurality of views in European democracies. Journalists should be free to criticize without fear of prosecution or infringed right to freedom of expression and be ensured the protection, safety and empowerment.
Amendment 77 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 5 (5) Journalists and small independent press publishers play an important role in facilitating public debate and in the imparting and reception of information, opinions and ideas. It is essential that they are afforded the necessary space to contribute to an open, free and fair debate and to counter disinformation, information manipulation and interference. Journalists should be able to conduct their activities effectively to ensure that citizens have access to a plurality of views in European
Amendment 78 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 5 (5) Journalists, news editors and press publishers play an important role in facilitating public debate and in the imparting and reception of information, opinions and ideas. It is essential that they are afforded the necessary space to contribute to an open, free and fair debate and to counter disinformation, information manipulation and interference. Journalists should be able to conduct their activities effectively to ensure that citizens have access to a plurality of views in European democracies.
Amendment 79 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 5 a (new) (5 a) Journalists also bear an important responsibility to remain objective in the process of gathering and dissemination of information, as well as in their editorial process; this includes ensuring that journalism is free of political influences, undisclosed financial relations and targeted smear campaigns, or so-called "hit pieces"; guaranteeing high levels of transparency for journalists is, therefore, essential to having a well-informed society;
Amendment 80 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 7 (7) Human rights defenders a
Amendment 81 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 7 (7) Human rights defenders also play an important role in European democracies, especially in upholding fundamental rights, democratic values, social inclusion, environmental protection and the rule of law. They should be able to participate actively in public life and make their voice heard on policy matters and in decision-making processes without fear of intimidation. Human rights defenders refer to individuals or organisations engaged in defending fundamental rights
Amendment 82 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 7 (7) Human rights defenders also play an important role in European democracies, especially in upholding fundamental rights, democratic values, social inclusion, environmental protection and the rule of law. They should be able to participate actively in public life and make their voice heard on policy matters and in decision-making processes without fear of intimidation. Human rights defenders refer to individuals or organisations engaged in defending fundamental rights and a variety of other rights, such as environmental and climate rights, women’s rights, LGBTIQ rights, the rights of the people with a minority racial or ethnic background, the rights of migrants, refugees and asylum seekers, labour rights or religious freedoms. Other
Amendment 83 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 7 (7) Human rights defenders also play an important role in European democracies, especially in upholding fundamental rights, democratic values, social inclusion, environmental protection and the rule of law. They should be able to participate actively in public life, promote accountability, and make their voice heard on policy matters and in decision-making processes without fear of intimidation. Human rights defenders refer to individuals or organisations engaged in defending fundamental rights and a variety of other rights, such as environmental and climate rights, women’s rights, LGBTIQ rights, the rights of the people with a minority racial or ethnic background, labour rights, trade union rights or religious freedoms. Other participants in public debate, such as academics and researchers, artists and whistleblowers also deserve adequate protection.
Amendment 84 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 7 a (new) (7 a) Unfounded or abusive litigation often targets minorities. Racial, religious and ethnic minorities in particular are too often subjected to structural discrimination, as evidenced in the EU anti-racism action plan 2020-2025. Special attention should be paid to ensure that this Directive effectively helps to combat this phenomenon and improve the situation. In addition, among human rights defenders women, LGBTIQ and gender rights defenders play a crucial role in advocating a gender-equal Europe. This Directive should foresee their active participation to help curb abusive litigation and allow the highest possible protection for gender-based victims of SLAPPs.
Amendment 85 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 8 (8) A healthy and thriving democracy requires that people are able to participate actively in public debate without undue interference by public authority or other powerful actors, be they domestic or foreign. In order to secure meaningful participation, people should be able to access reliable information, which enables them to form their own opinions and exercise their own judgement in a public space, where in which different views can be expressed freely. Therefore, media literacy programmes and anti- disinformation campaigns should be an essential instrument for Member States to protect their citizens against undue interference in the public debate. Legal professionals, handling cases related to public participation of individuals acting on matters of public interest, should be offered adequate trainings on how to effectively identify an abuse of procedure in the detriment of the defendant, who is considered acting on a matter of public interest.
Amendment 86 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 8 (8) A healthy and thriving democracy requires that people are able to participate actively in public debate without undue interference by public authority or other powerful actors, be they domestic or foreign. Thus, it is essential to mainstream awareness raising about their rights and freedoms, along with ensuring adequate access to educational and training activities that develop media literacy and critical thinking. In order to secure meaningful participation, people should be able to access reliable information, which enables them to form their own opinions and exercise their own judgement in a public space in which different views can be expressed freely.
Amendment 87 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 8 (8) A healthy and thriving democracy requires that people are able to participate actively in public debate without undue interference by public authority or other powerful actors, be they domestic or foreign. In order to secure meaningful participation, people should be able to access reliable, objective and unbiased information, which enables them to form their own opinions and exercise their own judgement in a public space in which different views can be expressed freely.
Amendment 88 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 8 a (new) (8 a) A healthy civil society relies on an effective legal system, allowing natural and legal persons access to an effective ramedy and a fair trial, as set out in Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union; it is essential to ensure that the measures against SLAPPs set out in this Directive are not abused as a means to shield bad- faith and otherwise abusive practices by journalists and human rights defenders enacted under the guise of public participation;
Amendment 89 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 9 (9) To foster this environment, it is important to protect natural or legal persons who engage in public participation, in particular journalists and human rights defenders from court proceedings against public participation. Such court proceedings are not initiated for the purpose of access to justice, but to silence public debate typically using harassment and intimidation. Court proceeding against public participations are restricting investigations and informing the public of legitimate public interest and therefore hindering the role of watchdogs and restraining the health of democracies.
Amendment 90 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 9 (9) To foster
Amendment 91 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 9 (9) To foster this environment, it is important to protect
Amendment 92 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 9 (9) To foster this environment, it is important to protect
Amendment 93 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 9 a (new) (9 a) Digitalization has profoundly changed the media landscape with new ways to access, share or retrieve online news items. Currently accessibility of online material where public participation in debate over matters of public matters occurs on the internet and often transcends national borders and it has become increasingly difficult to locate and estimate the scope of online media coverage in the remit of only Member State. It is therefore important to assess the localisation of public participation in the digital environment in the broadest sense possible
Amendment 94 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 9 b (new) (9 b) Media literacy programmes are an essential tool to foster a thriving democratic public debate and public participation. In order to prevent the misuse of the existing procedural safeguards, an emphasize should be put on proper training and upskilling of legal professionals dealing with SLAPP cases, taking fully into account the established case-law of the European Court of Human Rights.
Amendment 95 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 9 c (new) (9 c) While respecting the editorial freedom of journalists and the media, Member States should encourage awareness-raising activities for the benefit of journalists and other media actors, on the importance of acting in accordance with journalistic, legal or other professional ethics as a prevention tool against SLAPPs. Member States should also develop or facilitate the development of wider awareness-raising strategies and measures aimed at the general public that focus on SLAPPs and their harmful impact.
Amendment 96 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 10 (10) SLAPPs are typically initiated by powerful entities, for example individuals, lobby groups, corporations, political parties and state organs. They often involve an imbalance of power between the parties, with the claimant having a more powerful financial or political position than the defendant. Although not being an indispensable component of such cases, where present, an imbalance of power significantly increases the harmful effects as well as the chilling effects of court proceedings against public participation. SLAPPs as unfounded or abusive court proceedings can be used in civil procedures, but also civil claims brought in criminal proceedings and administrative procedures via arbitrary or vexatious use of legislation, often as defamation lawsuits, against public participation wishing to silence criticism and prevent public scrutiny to the detriment of a public debate.
Amendment 97 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 10 (10) SLAPPs are typically initiated by powerful entities, for example individuals, lobby groups, corporations and state organs. They often involve an imbalance of power between the parties, with the claimant having a more powerful financial or political position than the defendant.
Amendment 98 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 10 (10) SLAPPs are typically initiated by powerful entities, for example individuals, lobby groups, corporations and state
Amendment 99 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 11 (11) Court proceedings against public participation may have an adverse impact on the credibility and reputation of journalists and human rights defenders or any other natural or legal person expressed or carried out in exercise of the right to freedom of expression and information on a matter of legitimate public interest and exhaust their financial and other resources. Because of such proceedings, the publication of information on a matter of public interest may be delayed or altogether avoided. Moreover, court proceedings against public participation are often based on false accusations against journalists and human rights defenders.The length of procedures and the financial pressure may have a chilling effect on journalists and human rights defenders. The existence of such practices may therefore have a deterrent effect on their work by contributing to silencing critical voices, including self-censorship in anticipation of possible future court proceeding as not all SLAPPs reach the court and often remain as a threat of a lawsuits, which leads to the impoverishment of public debate to the detriment of society as a whole.
source: 745.281
|
History
(these mark the time of scraping, not the official date of the change)
events/11 |
|
events/11 |
|
events/11 |
|
events/11 |
|
docs/6 |
|
docs/6 |
|
events/10/summary |
|
docs/6 |
|
events/10 |
|
procedure/stage_reached |
Old
Awaiting Parliament's position in 1st readingNew
Awaiting Council's 1st reading position |
links |
|
events/9 |
|
docs/6/date |
Old
2022-07-10T00:00:00New
2022-07-11T00:00:00 |
docs/7/date |
Old
2022-12-20T00:00:00New
2022-12-21T00:00:00 |
events/6 |
|
docs/7 |
|
docs/6 |
|
events/6/summary |
|
docs/6 |
|
events/5/docs |
|
events/6 |
|
events/7 |
|
forecasts |
|
events/5 |
|
forecasts/0 |
|
docs/6 |
|
events/4/summary |
|
forecasts/0/title |
Old
Indicative plenary sitting dateNew
Debate in plenary scheduled |
forecasts/1 |
|
docs/6 |
|
events/4 |
|
procedure/stage_reached |
Old
Awaiting committee decisionNew
Awaiting Parliament's position in 1st reading |
events/3 |
|
procedure/Other legal basis |
Rules of Procedure EP 159
|
docs/5 |
|
docs/4 |
|
docs/4/date |
Old
2022-07-11T00:00:00New
2022-07-10T00:00:00 |
docs/4/date |
Old
2022-07-10T00:00:00New
2022-07-11T00:00:00 |
committees/3 |
|
committees/3 |
|
docs/4/date |
Old
2022-07-11T00:00:00New
2022-07-10T00:00:00 |
docs/4/date |
Old
2022-07-10T00:00:00New
2022-07-11T00:00:00 |
docs/4/date |
Old
2022-07-11T00:00:00New
2022-07-10T00:00:00 |
docs/4/date |
Old
2022-07-10T00:00:00New
2022-07-11T00:00:00 |
docs/3 |
|
docs/3/date |
Old
2022-07-11T00:00:00New
2022-07-10T00:00:00 |
docs/3/date |
Old
2022-07-10T00:00:00New
2022-07-11T00:00:00 |
docs/3/date |
Old
2022-07-11T00:00:00New
2022-07-10T00:00:00 |
docs/3/date |
Old
2022-07-10T00:00:00New
2022-07-11T00:00:00 |
forecasts |
|
committees/0/shadows/3 |
|
docs/1 |
|
docs/2 |
|
docs/2/docs/0/url |
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/JURI-PR-745170_EN.html
|
docs/3 |
|
docs/3 |
|
procedure/Legislative priorities/0 |
|
procedure/Legislative priorities/0/title |
Old
Joint Declaration on EU legislative priorities for 2023 and 2024New
Joint Declaration 2023-24 |
procedure/Legislative priorities/1 |
|
procedure/Legislative priorities/1 |
|
docs/0 |
|
docs/3 |
|
docs/3/date |
Old
2022-07-11T00:00:00New
2022-07-10T00:00:00 |
docs/4 |
|
events/0 |
|
docs/0 |
|
docs/3 |
|
docs/4 |
|
docs/4/date |
Old
2022-07-10T00:00:00New
2022-07-11T00:00:00 |
events/0 |
|
committees/2/rapporteur/0/date |
Old
2022-10-25T00:00:00New
2023-01-12T00:00:00 |
docs/2 |
|
committees/3/rapporteur |
|
docs/0 |
|
docs/2 |
|
docs/2/date |
Old
2022-07-11T00:00:00New
2022-07-10T00:00:00 |
docs/3 |
|
events/0 |
|
events/2 |
|
committees/3 |
|
committees/3 |
|
docs/0 |
|
docs/2 |
|
docs/3 |
|
docs/3/date |
Old
2022-07-10T00:00:00New
2022-07-11T00:00:00 |
events/0 |
|
procedure/legal_basis/0 |
Rules of Procedure EP 57
|
committees/3 |
|
docs/0 |
|
docs/2 |
|
docs/2/date |
Old
2022-07-11T00:00:00New
2022-07-10T00:00:00 |
docs/3 |
|
events/0 |
|
docs/0 |
|
docs/2 |
|
docs/3 |
|
docs/3/date |
Old
2022-07-10T00:00:00New
2022-07-11T00:00:00 |
events/0 |
|
docs/2 |
|
docs/0 |
|
events/0 |
|
docs/0 |
|
events/0 |
|
procedure/title |
Old
Protection of persons who engage in public participation from manifestly unfounded or abusive court proceedings (“Strategic lawsuits against public participation”)New
Protection of journalists and human rights defenders from manifestly unfounded or abusive court proceedings |
committees/2/rapporteur |
|
committees/1/opinion |
False
|
docs/0 |
|
events/0 |
|
docs/0 |
|
events/0 |
|
docs/0 |
|
events/0 |
|
docs/0 |
|
events/0 |
|
committees/1 |
|
committees/0 |
|
committees/0 |
|
docs/1 |
|
committees/0/shadows/1 |
|
docs/0/docs/0 |
|
procedure/Legislative priorities |
|
events/0/docs/1 |
|
committees/0 |
|
committees/0 |
|
docs/0 |
|
events/0 |
|