EU member states must not water down Anti-SLAPP law

This week, the Presidency of the European Council published a compromise Anti-SLAPP Directive text intended to help reach a consensus position between the three institutional arms of the European Union - the Council (made up of national governments), the Commission and the European Parliament.

Together with other civil society organisations campaigning for proper protections against abusive nuisance litigation aimed at those participating in public debate, we are deeply concerned by the content of this proposal, which excludes or negates key provisions in the text proposed by the European Commission almost a year ago.

Among the retrograde changes in the compromise draft are a narrowing of the understanding of a "cross-border" case, by eliminating the concept of a public interest that applies in more than one member state. Along with a new threshold for early dismissal that means it will be no easier to end nuisance litigation expeditiously than it is today, these are significant changes to the core provisions of the Directive.

In effect, this text represents an attempt by a group of national governments, who are sceptical of the need for Anti-SLAPP protections, to stop the EU as a whole from moving ahead. In the next few days, civil society coalitions based in EU member states will be making it clear to their national governments that they expect them to take a stronger line to safeguard the position of journalists and human rights defenders across the Union.