Labour ministers are understood to be supportive of the Commons and Lords bills aimed at curbing strategic lawsuits against public participation (Slapps). These private members' bills, introduced by Conservative MPs within 24 hours of each other, are expected to attract cross-party support.
Coordinated Push for Protection
A coordinated effort to shield whistleblowers, journalists, and sexual assault victims from lawsuits intended to silence them has been launched in both houses of parliament. Two private members' bills targeting Slapps have been introduced by Conservative members and are likely to gain broad political backing.
Labour ministers are reportedly supportive of the measures, following frustration within the Ministry of Justice that similar reforms were not included in the king's speech. However, progress remains at an early stage due to political uncertainties surrounding a potential leadership challenge to Keir Starmer, though the MoJ is expected to provide drafting advice.
Background and Campaign
The bills follow a long-running campaign for better protection against financially devastating lawsuits for those speaking on matters of public interest. Claims that go to trial can cost up to £1 million per party in legal fees, with the losing party covering the winner's costs.
Tina Stowell, former BBC communications chief and leader of the House of Lords under David Cameron, published a draft bill on Tuesday. John Whittingdale, MP for Maldon and former Conservative culture secretary, presented his strategic litigation against public participation bill on Wednesday.
Whittingdale stated that his bill, set for debate in November, has support across parliament and from all sections of the media. He described Slapps as an abuse of the legal system, used by the rich and powerful to suppress legitimate investigative journalism and muzzle free expression.
Lady Stowell added: "The attack on free speech represented by Slapps is a stain on our legal system and a threat to a functioning democracy. For too long British courts have been used to hush up unethical behaviour and corporate abuses."
Key Provisions
Stowell's draft bill allows defendants facing libel suits or other legal actions to request early dismissal by a judge, before costs escalate, if they can demonstrate the case relates to a matter of public interest. Defendants whose cases are dismissed may also recover costs, and courts can impose penalties on claimants who deliberately prolong proceedings or cause delays.
Susan Coughtrie, co-chair of the UK Anti-Slapps Coalition, welcomed the initiative: "Now we have the opportunity to turn this support into robust, accessible and universal protections for everyone, ensuring justice is available to all, not just those who can afford it. Left unaddressed, Slapps allow bad-faith actors to control and restrict public information, impacting our knowledge of the world."
Media and High-Profile Cases
The Guardian and other media outlets have highlighted how wealthy individuals and corporations, including oligarchs, use legal threats to silence those with fewer resources. In several high-profile cases, women reporting rape and sexual abuse have been taken to court after speaking out.
Both Conservative and Labour leaders have supported reform. In 2023, the Conservatives introduced limited protections for those exposing economic crimes like money laundering, but the legislation does not cover human rights issues. In October 2024, Keir Starmer promised action, calling the abuse of courts by the rich and powerful "intolerable," though the government has yet to propose its own legislation.
International Context
Other countries already have anti-Slapp laws. In many US states, judges have broad powers to dismiss abusive cases. In the EU, a directive was introduced in 2024, but member states have been slow to implement it. The EU law excludes criminal matters but allows EU citizens sued abroad to challenge their accusers in EU courts. Greenpeace has tested this provision in the Netherlands in a case involving a US oil pipeline company.
