A system that takes Yevgeny Prigozhin’s complaints seriously is not fit for purpose
‘Government takes action to stop Slapp lawsuits muzzling reporters” sounds like good news, and many journalists seem to believe it, as no doubt does the Culture Secretary, Lucy Frazer, who announced it yesterday. Unfortunately, this will not be the case.
Slapp stands for “strategic lawsuits against public participation” – a nonsense name invented by American academics to denote legal actions brought by the wealthy to kill media investigations. In America, they can be stopped readily by judges because they infringe the free speech guarantee in the first amendment. In Britain, though, it is a different story.
If the Government really wants to enhance freedom of speech, it must reform the law entirely. Defence of free speech has become unaffordable for most people – simple defamation actions may cost millions in legal expenses. Writers and editors capitulate to wealthy litigants and simply do not publish what they believe is true lest they receive a claim.
Defamation law in the UK is notoriously favourable to claimants – US journalists refer to London as “a town called Sue”. In other civil actions, the party coming to court seeking damages must prove their case, but here the media is always on the defensive, bearing the burden of proof in not only the truth of its statements but their public interest and honesty of comment.