Why in News
Supreme Court makes a case against pre-trial restraint on journalistic content.
A restatement of basic principles of law is always welcome, especially if there are judicial orders that seem to ignore them.
The Supreme Court’s recent order cautioning courts against granting pre-trial injunctions against the media in civil suits for defamation is a reminder that such orders could have severe ramifications on the freedom of speech and may impair the public’s right to know.
What is ‘SLAPP’ (Strategic Litigation/Lawsuit against Public Participation)
SLAPP stands for Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation or sometimes “Strategic Litigation Against Public Participation”.
It's a lawsuit designed to silence critics by burying them in legal fees and wasting their time.
Here's how SLAPP suits work:
Target: Someone criticizing a powerful entity, like a corporation, government agency, or wealthy individual, on a matter of public interest.
This could be activism, investigative journalism, or even just speaking out at a local town hall meeting.
Goal: Stifle criticism by making the defense expensive and draining.
The lawsuit itself may be weak, but the idea is to force the critic to spend so much money defending themselves that they give up.
Effect: A chilling effect on free speech.
If people fear being sued for speaking out, they may be less likely to criticize powerful entities, even if their concerns are valid.
To combat SLAPP suits, many jurisdictions have passed anti-SLAPP laws.
These laws make it easier for defendants to get SLAPP suits thrown out early, reducing the financial burden.
COMMENTS