View all newsletters
Sign up for our free email newsletters

Fighting for quality news media in the digital age.

  1. Media Law
November 27, 2024

Lords slam government inaction on SLAPPs, calling for action by summer

The government last week ruled out immediate legislation, saying SLAPPs were a "complex area".

By Bron Maher

A House of Lords inquiry into how the news industry can survive into the future has accused the government of “failing to prioritise” action on strategic lawsuits against public participation (SLAPPs).

The Communications and Digital Committee’s “The Future of News” inquiry said in its final report that there was no longer “a valid excuse for lengthy delays” and “what is missing now is political will”.

The committee has called on the government to publish draft legislative proposals to tackle the issue — which sees journalists and publishers silenced or punished by expensive, vexatious lawsuits — before the summer recess.

Action on SLAPPs is one part of a package of recommendations made by the inquiry in the hope of staving off an “irreparable” fracture in the news environment within the decade.

Select and enter your email address Weekly insight into the big strategic issues affecting the future of the news industry. Essential reading for media leaders every Thursday. Your morning brew of news about the world of news from Press Gazette and elsewhere in the media. Sent at around 10am UK time. Our weekly dose of strategic insight about the future of news media aimed at US readers. A fortnightly update from the front-line of news and advertising. Aimed at marketers and those involved in the advertising industry.
  • Business owner/co-owner
  • CEO
  • COO
  • CFO
  • CTO
  • Chairperson
  • Non-Exec Director
  • Other C-Suite
  • Managing Director
  • President/Partner
  • Senior Executive/SVP or Corporate VP or equivalent
  • Director or equivalent
  • Group or Senior Manager
  • Head of Department/Function
  • Manager
  • Non-manager
  • Retired
  • Other
Visit our privacy Policy for more information about our services, how Progressive Media Investments may use, process and share your personal data, including information on your rights in respect of your personal data and how you can unsubscribe from future marketing communications.
Thank you

Thanks for subscribing.

Last week Labour ruled out introducing a dedicated SLAPP bill during the current parliamentary session despite having pledged to take action on the matter during the election campaign.

Justice Minister Heidi Alexander argued SLAPPs were a “complex area and we should not legislate in haste”.

Prime Minister Keir Starmer had written as recently as last month that the government “will tackle the use of SLAPPs to protect investigative journalism”.

The previous government wrote protections for SLAPPs into the Economic Crime and Corporate Transparency Bill, but they only address coverage relating to economic crime, which the lords said “excluded a wide range of topics”. A Private Member’s Bill tackling SLAPPs reached its second reading earlier this year but was not passed before the general election.

The inquiry said: “The new Government is failing to prioritise anti-SLAPP legislation.

“This is troubling and has serious potential consequences for press freedom and the future of the news industry.

“There has already been a public consultation. Viable legislative options and precedents exist. What is missing now is political will.

“Its absence reflects poorly on the new Government’s values and commitment to justice. We are not persuaded that the complexity of the issue, or the need for cross-government engagement, are a valid excuse for lengthy delays.

“The Government should publish draft legislative proposals before the 2025 summer recess and allow time for proper scrutiny. If necessary it should explore using the Victims, Courts and Public Protection Bill, announced in the recent King’s Speech, as a vehicle.”

Lords say financial penalties for lawyers pursuing slaps should be 10,000 times higher

The inquiry heard evidence from journalists, media freedom organisations and the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) about SLAPPs, as well as the Society for Media Lawyers which has argued complaints on lawfare are “overblown”.

The peers said they “applaud” progress made by the SRA on SLAPPs in recent years, but criticised a thematic evaluation of the practice it has undertaken “that deliberately exclude[s] the law firms accused of malpractice.

“Predictably and implausibly, these evaluations have found limited evidence of wrongdoing. This risks creating a flawed evidence base to inform public debate.”

They also called for the maximum amount the SRA can fine solicitor firms enabling SLAPPs to be raised from £25,000 to £250m. The lords said £250m is the figure the SRA can fine other types of licensed bodies, and “we have been unable to discern any clear rationale for this discrepancy”.

The chief executive of the SRA, Paul Philip, told the committee last year that “the fining regime should be increased and that it is not an adequate deterrent.

“It is a pea-shooter against a tank, to use the analogy, and therefore it should be increased.”

Last week The Bureau of Investigative Journalism helped organise a debate in the House of Commons at which MPs from across the political spectrum called for legislation to end SLAPPs, citing their use by Mohamed Al-Fayed and the Post Office during the Horizon scandal.

Topics in this article : , , ,

Email pged@pressgazette.co.uk to point out mistakes, provide story tips or send in a letter for publication on our "Letters Page" blog

Select and enter your email address Weekly insight into the big strategic issues affecting the future of the news industry. Essential reading for media leaders every Thursday. Your morning brew of news about the world of news from Press Gazette and elsewhere in the media. Sent at around 10am UK time. Our weekly dose of strategic insight about the future of news media aimed at US readers. A fortnightly update from the front-line of news and advertising. Aimed at marketers and those involved in the advertising industry.
  • Business owner/co-owner
  • CEO
  • COO
  • CFO
  • CTO
  • Chairperson
  • Non-Exec Director
  • Other C-Suite
  • Managing Director
  • President/Partner
  • Senior Executive/SVP or Corporate VP or equivalent
  • Director or equivalent
  • Group or Senior Manager
  • Head of Department/Function
  • Manager
  • Non-manager
  • Retired
  • Other
Visit our privacy Policy for more information about our services, how Progressive Media Investments may use, process and share your personal data, including information on your rights in respect of your personal data and how you can unsubscribe from future marketing communications.
Thank you

Thanks for subscribing.

Websites in our network