Resolving Land-Use Disputes by Intimidation: Slapp Suits ...
A legal solution to SLAPP.… · enforcement of such foreign judgment in Malta. Furthermore, in the...
4
www.mitla.org.mt | [email protected] SmartCity Malta, SCM1001, Ricasoli, Malta A legal solution to SLAPP. A Maltese solution protecting against SLAPP and Libel Tourism is not only required, but legally possible. Malta needs to nurture freedom of speech and ensure that appropriate safeguards are in place to secure such fundamental rights, Statement by the Malta Information Technology Law Association (www.mitla.org.mt) For immediate release Friday, 2 nd February, 2018 The Malta Information Technology Law Association (MITLA) is following the discussion in relation to SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuits against Public Participation) and notes the Private Member’s Bill presented to Parliament by the Nationalist Party. A Maltese solution protecting against SLAPP and Libel Tourism is required and legally possible but requires a reassessment of our fundamental right to freedom of expression in today’s digital world. A Maltese solution should recognise that freedom of speech is a fundamental human right enshrined in Article 41 of the Constitution of Malta and other applicable international treaties and conventions, and the protection of such right is necessary both offline and online. The obstruction or interference on the rights of journalists and persons habitually working in this field, through the filing (or threat of filing) of foreign defamation lawsuits has a chilling effect on the right to freedom of expression and attacks the right of the Maltese public to receive information on matters of public importance. This right is itself enshrined in Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and Article 10 of the European Convention of Human Rights, amongst others. Foreign defamation lawsuits risk supressing such fundamental rights, especially where the cause of action on which the foreign judgment is based is repugnant to the public policy of Malta. This is itself exacerbated when the foreign court is a seriously inconvenient forum for the action. MITLA believes that SLAPP is a matter of public concern and therefore should be a matter of Maltese public policy. MITLA notes that there are no harmonised laws, at a European, US Federal or international level regarding SLAPP and that the situation in the US is still very fragmented on this front. Any anti-SLAPP legislative intervention must ensure that the rights of both parties in a defamation suit have to be respected and protected. On the one hand, protecting citizens from improper intimidation, and on the other safeguarding the right of access to the courts. As established by the 2008 Supreme Court of Rhode Island (US) in Palazzo v. Alves 1 : 2 https://www.law.cornell.edu/nyctap/I07_0173.htm
Transcript of A legal solution to SLAPP.… · enforcement of such foreign judgment in Malta. Furthermore, in the...
www.mitla.org.mt|[email protected],SCM1001,Ricasoli,Malta
AlegalsolutiontoSLAPP.AMaltesesolutionprotectingagainstSLAPPandLibelTourismisnotonlyrequired,butlegallypossible.
Maltaneedstonurturefreedomofspeechandensurethatappropriatesafeguardsareinplacetosecuresuchfundamentalrights,
StatementbytheMaltaInformationTechnologyLawAssociation(www.mitla.org.mt)ForimmediatereleaseFriday,2ndFebruary,2018
TheMaltaInformationTechnologyLawAssociation(MITLA)isfollowingthediscussioninrelationtoSLAPP(StrategicLawsuitsagainstPublicParticipation)andnotesthePrivateMember’sBillpresentedtoParliamentbytheNationalistParty.
AMaltesesolutionprotectingagainstSLAPPandLibelTourismisrequiredandlegallypossiblebutrequiresareassessmentofourfundamentalrighttofreedomofexpressionintoday’sdigitalworld.
AMaltesesolutionshouldrecognisethatfreedomofspeechisafundamentalhumanrightenshrinedinArticle41oftheConstitutionofMaltaandotherapplicableinternationaltreatiesandconventions,andtheprotectionofsuchrightisnecessarybothofflineandonline.
Theobstructionorinterferenceontherightsofjournalistsandpersonshabituallyworkinginthisfield,throughthefiling(orthreatoffiling)offoreigndefamationlawsuitshasachillingeffectontherighttofreedomofexpressionandattackstherightoftheMaltesepublictoreceiveinformationonmattersofpublicimportance.ThisrightisitselfenshrinedinArticle19oftheUniversalDeclarationofHumanRightsandArticle10oftheEuropeanConventionofHumanRights,amongstothers.
Foreigndefamationlawsuitsrisksupressingsuchfundamentalrights,especiallywherethecauseofactiononwhichtheforeignjudgmentisbasedisrepugnanttothepublicpolicyofMalta.Thisisitselfexacerbatedwhentheforeigncourtisaseriouslyinconvenientforumfortheaction.MITLAbelievesthatSLAPPisamatterofpublicconcernandthereforeshouldbeamatterofMaltesepublicpolicy.
MITLAnotesthattherearenoharmonisedlaws,ataEuropean,USFederalorinternationallevelregardingSLAPPandthatthesituationintheUSisstillveryfragmentedonthisfront.Anyanti-SLAPPlegislativeinterventionmustensurethattherightsofbothpartiesinadefamationsuithavetoberespectedandprotected.Ontheonehand,protectingcitizensfromimproperintimidation,andontheothersafeguardingtherightofaccesstothecourts.
Asestablishedbythe2008SupremeCourtofRhodeIsland(US)inPalazzov.Alves1:
2https://www.law.cornell.edu/nyctap/I07_0173.htm
www.mitla.org.mt|[email protected],SCM1001,Ricasoli,Malta
“Bythenatureoftheirsubjectmatter,anti-SLAPPstatutesrequiremeticulousdrafting.Ontheonehand,itisdesirabletoseektoshieldcitizensfromimproperintimidationwhenexercisingtheirconstitutionalrighttobeheardwithrespecttoissuesofpublicconcern. Ontheotherhand,itisimportantthatsuchstatutesbelimitedinscopelesttheconstitutionalrightofaccesstothecourts(whetherbyprivatefigures,publicfigures,orpublicofficials)beimproperlythwarted. Thereisagenuinedouble-edgedchallengetothosewholegislateinthisarea”.
MITLAclarifieshowever,thatthemostpressingconcernfromaMaltesepointofviewisnotprimarilyrelatedtoSLAPPeventhoughsuchissueisindeedrelevantinalocalcontext.TheprimethreatcurrentlybeingexperiencedinMaltaisSLAPPoriginatingfromforeignjurisdictions,embodiedinlibeltourism:amethodofforumshoppingforlibelsuits.
WhilstnofederallawexistsintheUnitedStatesrelatingtoSLAPP,thesamecannotbesaidwithrespectoflibeltourism.Followinga2007NewYorkAppealsCourtDecisioninEhrenfeldvMahfouz2,theStateofNewYorkintroducedanamendmenttotheirlawsofprocedurewhichincludeddirectreferencestotheabilityforacourtinNewYorktorecogniseadefamationjudgmentobtainedfromaforeigncourt,includingcourtsinotherUSstates.ThisinitiativewasthenadoptedataUSFederallevelwiththeenactmentin2010ofthe“SecuringtheProtectionofourEnduringandEstablishedConstitutionalHeritageAct”orSPEECHAct3aimed“toprohibitrecognitionandenforcementofforeigndefamationjudgements”andapplyingtheAmericanconstitutionalheritageoftheFirstAmendmentwithrespecttoforeigndefamationjudgments.ItisararethatalawintheUSgarnersaunanimousvoteinbothhousesofCongress,butthepassageoftheSPEECHActdemonstratedthatRepublicansandDemocratsagreeonatleastonething:foreignlibellawsshouldnotchillU.S.speech.CouldMaltaactwithsimilarsingle-purposeonsuchmatter?
MITLAbelievesthatanyMalteseapproachshouldbebuiltonthesamephilosophy,thatisensuringthatourconstitutionalprovisionsvis-à-visfreedomofspeechareappliedandshieldMaltesepersonsfromthreatsemanatingorarisingfromsituationsofSLAPPand,mostimportantly,libeltourism.ThisshouldbeamatterofpublicpolicyandthereshouldbenodoubtthattheMalteseConstitutionisthecrystallisationofthepublicpolicyofournation.
Reflectingtheprincipleswhichdrivethe2010USSPEECHAct,aMalteselegislativeinterventionwouldprimarilyconsidertheintroductionofatwo-parttest:(i)thatnoMaltesecourtshouldrecogniseaforeigndefamationjudgmentunlesstheMaltesecourtdeterminesthatthedefamationlawappliedintheforeignjurisdictionprovidedatleastasmuchprotectiontofreedomofspeechaswouldbeprovidedundertheMalteseConstitutionandotherinternationalconventionsandtreatiestowhichMaltaisaparty;and(ii)evenifthedefamationlawappliedintheforeigndefamationjudgementdidnotprovideasmuchprotectionasourConstitutionalrighttofreedomofspeech,thepartyopposingrecognitionorenforcementinMaltawouldhavebeenfoundliablefordefamationbyacourtinMaltathroughtheapplicationofMaltesedefamationlawsandtheapplicationofourconstitutionallyprotectedrights.Theobligationtoshowthatthetwo-parttestismetinfrontoftheMaltesecourtsshouldbeontheplaintiffrequestingtherecognitionorenforcementofsuchforeignjudgmentinMalta.
Furthermore,intheapplicationtohavetheforeigndefamationjudgmentrecognisedorenforceableinMalta,theplaintiffwouldneedtoprovethattheexerciseofpersonaljurisdictionbytheforeigncourtisconsonantwiththeMalteseproceduralrulesregardingjurisdiction,amongstothers.
2https://www.law.cornell.edu/nyctap/I07_0173.htm3https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/PLAW-111publ223/content-detail.html
www.mitla.org.mt|[email protected],SCM1001,Ricasoli,Malta
Additionally,anyMaltesepersonagainstwhomaforeigndefamationjudgementisenteredshouldberecognisedtherightatlawinMaltatobringanactioninfrontoftheMaltesecourtsseekingthatsuchforeigndefamationjudgmentisrepugnanttotherightsenshrinedinourConstitutionandapplicablelawsandtherighttoseekdamages.
Ultimately,thedrivingforcebehindpotentiallegislativeinterventionsshouldnotbelimitedtotheenforcementofforeigndefamationjudgementsagainstMaltesepersonsbutwidenedinscopetoprovideclaritytoourappreciationofthefundamentalrighttofreedomofexpressionasenshrinedininternationalconventionsasourConstitution.ThisconstitutionalshieldcanthenserveasthebasisofanylegislativeworkregardingtherecognitioninMaltaofforeigndefamationjudgements.
MITLAwillbeinthecomingweeksorganisingaworkshoptodiscussthecurrentlocalscenariosurroundingSLAPP,libeltourismandfreedomofspeechandwillbeinvitingjournalists,mediahousesaswellasrepresentativesfromGovernmentandtheOppositionforaninformeddebateaimedatreachingawiderconsensusonhowMaltacaneffectivelyfurthernurtureandprotectourrighttofeespeech.Furtherdetailsaboutthiseventwillbecommunicatedshortly.
www.mitla.org.mt|[email protected],SCM1001,Ricasoli,Malta
AboutMITLA:TheMaltaITLawAssociationwassetupin2014withthefollowingobjectives:
• Promotetheadvancementanddevelopmentofinformationtechnologylaw,includingbutnotsolelylimitedtocomputerlaw,internetlaw,electroniccommunicationslaw,informationlaw,electroniccommercelaw,remotegaminglawandcybercrime,(hereinafterreferredtoas“ICTLaw”)inMaltaandtheadvancementofMaltaasaninternationalcentreofexcellenceinICTLaw;
• Activelyresearch,discussandcirculateinformationonlegaldevelopmentstakingplaceontheinternationalplaneandwithintheEuropeanUnionwithrespecttoICTLawandtheknowledgeeconomy;
• Promotewithinternationalandregionalorganisationsorassociationsandothernationalgovernmentandnon-governmentbodieslegislativeandregulatorychangesrelatedtoICTLawandtoconsidertogetherwiththeseentitiesproposalsforlegislativeinterventionshavingthesameaim;
• AffordopportunitiesforthediscussionandconsiderationofmattersofinteresttomembersoftheAssociationandtoundertakeorassistinthepreparationoflegalinstrumentsandpapersinrespectofsuchmatters;and
• CollectandcirculatestatisticalandotherinformationofinteresttothemembersoftheAssociationandtoformacollectionofpublicationsanddocumentsaccessibletothemembersoftheAssociation.
MITLApresentlycountsmorethan200membersmostofwhichareC-suiteexecutivewhichhailfromthelegal,professionalandtechnicalprofessions.
Visithttp://www.mitla.org.mtformoreinformation
