This piece was reprinted by OpEd News with permission or license. It may not be reproduced in any form without permission or license from the source.
- Local disputes: the more local, the smaller the number of people willing to influence public action.
- Absurd claim amounts: some are unconnected to damage caused.
- Baseless, borderline or negligible suits: SLAPPs rest on shaky grounds. Some courts reject them. At the same time, defendants must enlist legal help.
- Plaintiffs' refusal to accept an apology or correction. Doing so ensures protracted legal war.
- Warning and threatening letters: Sending them intimidates enough to silence.
SLAPPs entail social costs. Free expression is chilled. Public activism and discourse are discouraged. Doing so exacts a heavy price.
Democracy dies in shadows. Sunshine is the best disinfectant. SLAPPs deter its effectiveness. They divert arguments from public space to courts. Ordinary people are greatly disadvantaged.
Civil suits take years. They're financially and emotionally draining. Defendants have a heavy cross to bear. Proceedings often end inconclusively. Vital critiques are silenced.
According to ACRI attorney Avner Pinchuk:
"(W)e are witnessing libel claims with a weak or even outlandish basis, yet which are an effective silencing measure against social and environmental activists who speak on matters of public importance.""Though the court seeks in the course of the trial to maintain a balance between freedom of expression and the right to maintain one's good name, it fails to see the big picture."
Next Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
1
1
1
