SLAPP

South Africa's court system has been abused by powerful people: five ways to stop it

Retrieved on: 
Saturday, September 16, 2023

Some of the public protector’s troubles landed up in court, with numerous judgments going against her.

Key Points: 
  • Some of the public protector’s troubles landed up in court, with numerous judgments going against her.
  • The office has the power to investigate, report on and remedy improper conduct in all state affairs.
  • The reason it took so long is that Mkhwebane used a strategy that’s referred to as the Stalingrad defence.
  • Drawing on my almost three decades of legal experience, I have identified five possible ways to reduce the chances of rich and powerful people abusing the court system and wasting precious resources.

The players

    • Unscrupulous clients: Powerful politicians show no concern about dipping into the public coffers to pay for the legal games they play.
    • But I would argue that those who have the backing of the state have a massive advantage over ordinary citizens.
    • it has displayed lax oversight and is not asking for explanations as to why lawyers are adopting these delaying practices.

What needs to be done

    • Firstly, the State Attorney should determine guidelines for what is – or is not – permissible and what the state will – and will not – fund.
    • A cost order by a court generally requires the offending litigant to pay a relatively minor percentage of the costs.
    • In July, the European Parliament adopted a range of measures to protect journalists and human rights defenders against such cases.
    • Advocate Gary Pienaar, senior research manager in the Developmental, Capable and Ethical State research division at the HSRC, contributed to this article.

Press release - Anti-SLAPP: EU protection against legal actions that silence critical voices

Retrieved on: 
Wednesday, June 28, 2023

The Legal Affairs Committee adopted its position on new rules to ensure EU-wide protection from vexatious lawsuits against public participation with 15 votes in favour, 1 against and 1 abstention.

Key Points: 
  • The Legal Affairs Committee adopted its position on new rules to ensure EU-wide protection from vexatious lawsuits against public participation with 15 votes in favour, 1 against and 1 abstention.
  • These are unfounded and abusive legal actions to silence those working in the public interest on matters such as fundamental rights, the environment and public access to information.
  • They also urge EU countries to implement the Commission’s recommendations for national cases, especially when it comes to legal assistance for those targeted.
  • The Commission presented its proposal in April 2022, including many of the measures MEPs were suggesting in their 2021 resolution.

JUSAN TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED BRINGS CLAIMS IN ENGLISH COURT TO CLEAR ITS NAME

Retrieved on: 
Friday, March 3, 2023

A UK business, Jusan Technologies Limited ("JTL") has commenced two defamation claims in the English Court, the first against The Bureau of Investigative Journalism ("TBIJ") and the Telegraph Media Group Limited ("TMGL"), and the second against openDemocracy Limited ("OD").

Key Points: 
  • A UK business, Jusan Technologies Limited ("JTL") has commenced two defamation claims in the English Court, the first against The Bureau of Investigative Journalism ("TBIJ") and the Telegraph Media Group Limited ("TMGL"), and the second against openDemocracy Limited ("OD").
  • JTL has commenced the following claims in the High Court of Justice of England and Wales:
    1.
  • OD also claims that JTL participated in a US$200 million transaction with a third party at a significant undervalue.
  • The cases are Jusan Technologies Ltd v The Bureau of Investigative Journalism and another, and Jusan Technologies Ltd v openDemocracy Ltd, case numbers QB-2022-002660 and QB-2022-002661, in the High Court of Justice of England and Wales.

New Study: Majority of States Lack Basic Free Speech Protections Against Frivolous Lawsuits

Retrieved on: 
Monday, February 28, 2022

A strong anti-SLAPP law is one of the best and easiest protections for free speech that states can provide.

Key Points: 
  • A strong anti-SLAPP law is one of the best and easiest protections for free speech that states can provide.
  • Thirty-one states were given grades of Ds or Fs, an indication of how widespread the risk from frivolous lawsuits is to American citizens free speech.
  • In all, 32 jurisdictions (31 states + D.C.) currently provide at least some protection against lawsuits that threaten free speech.
  • The First Amendment enshrines strong protections for free speech and free expression.