24 Nov 21 | News and features, Statements
Writer Catherine Belton
The undersigned organisations express their serious concern at the legal proceedings that are being brought against journalist and author Catherine Belton and her publisher HarperCollins.
The two defamation lawsuits are being brought by Russian businessman Roman Abramovich and the Russian state energy company Rosneft in relation to Belton’s book, Putin’s People: How the KGB took back Russia and then took on the West, which was published in April 2020.
Abramovich’s complaint relates to 26 extracts in the book, including the suggestion that his purchase of Chelsea Football Club in 2003 was directed by Russian president, Vladimir Putin. Rosneft’s complaint relates to claims that they participated in the expropriation of Yukos Oil Company, which had been privately owned by businessman Mikhail Khodorkovsky. Both claims were filed in March 2021.
“We believe that the lawsuits against Belton and HarperCollins amount to strategic lawsuits against public participation (SLAPPs),” the organisations said, referring to a form of legal harassment used by wealthy and powerful entities to silence journalists and other public watchdogs.
“SLAPPs are used to drain their targets of as much time, money, and energy as possible in order to bully them into silence. The individual may be sued personally and several lawsuits may be brought at the same time, including in different jurisdictions,” the organisations said. “These are hallmarks of SLAPPs, and they’re consistent with what Belton and HarperCollins have faced.”
Five separate claims were initially filed against Belton and HarperCollins, but three have since been resolved without the need for costs or damages being awarded to the claimants. In June 2021, Abramovich filed an additional lawsuit against HarperCollins in Australia in relation to Belton’s book.
“We, once again, urge the UK government to consider measures, including legislative reforms, that would protect public watchdogs from being subject to burdensome, lengthy, and financially draining legal actions, which can stifle public debate,” the organisations concluded. “Our democracy relies on their ability to hold power to account.”
SIGNED:
ARTICLE 19
Association of European Journalists (AEJ)
AEJ Polish Section
Blueprint for Free Speech
Campaign for Freedom of Information in Scotland (CFoIS)
Citizen Network Watchdog Poland
Cyrus R. Vance Center for International Justice
English PEN
European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF)
Index on Censorship
IFEX
Justice for Journalists Foundation
National Union of Journalists (NUJ)
OBC Transeuropa (OBCT)
PEN International
Reporters Without Borders (RSF)
Society of Journalists, Warsaw
Spotlight on Corruption
The Daphne Caruana Galizia Foundation
08 Oct 21 | Kazakhstan, Legal action against journalists, Media Freedom, News and features, Slapps, United Kingdom
[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]
Metal Alloy plant. Worker in orange jacket and white hardhat on train with Eurasian Resources Group (ENRC). Alexey Rezvykh / Alamy Stock Photo
The undersigned organisations express their serious concern at the legal proceedings that have been filed in a UK court against journalist and author Tom Burgis, his publisher HarperCollins, and his employer the Financial Times (FT). Two lawsuits have been filed by Kazakh multinational mining company, Eurasian Natural Resources Corporation (ENRC), for what it claims are a series of “untrue” and “highly damaging” allegations made by the defendants about the company.
The first lawsuit, against Burgis and HarperCollins, centres around multiple passages in Burgis’ 2020 book Kleptopia: How Dirty Money is Conquering the World. The second lawsuit, against Burgis and the FT, relates to two FT articles by Burgis, eleven Twitter posts by Burgis based on the articles, and an FT podcast in which Burgis was interviewed about his investigation.
“We are extremely concerned that the lawsuits against Tom Burgis, HarperCollins, and the FT are Strategic Lawsuits against Public Participation (SLAPPs). SLAPPs are a form of legal harassment used by those with deep pockets to silence journalists and other public watchdogs by exploiting intimidatingly long and expensive legal procedures,” the undersigned organisations said.
The lawsuits filed in London follow earlier legal suits by ENRC in US courts against HarperCollins seeking disclosure of wide-ranging information relating to the publication of Burgis’ book and newspaper articles published in the FT. In the London lawsuits, ENRC claims that the publications defamed the company, including by falsely suggesting that it was involved in the deaths of two whistleblowers (former ENRC employees), whose bodies were found at a motel in Missouri in 2015.
A criminal investigation by the UK’s Serious Fraud Office into alleged corruption within ENRC opened in 2013 and is ongoing. It is understood to be focused on allegations of fraud, bribery and corruption around the acquisition of substantial mineral assets in the Democratic Republic of Congo and elsewhere. No charges have yet been brought. ENRC denies all allegations.
Since the SFO announced its investigation, ENRC has initiated a wave of more than 18 legal proceedings in the US and the UK against journalists, lawyers, investigators, contractors, and a former SFO official and the SFO itself. In June 2021, twenty-two organisations issued a statement condemning the ENRC’s lawsuits against public watchdogs.
“The lawsuits against Burgis, HarperCollins, and the FT are the latest in a deluge of litigation brought by ENRC as it attempts to robustly challenge corruption allegations,” the organisations said. “We are extremely concerned that ENRC’s legal tactics are a further attempt to silence those who interrogate any possible links between the company and incidents that warrant proper public scrutiny.”
“We urge the UK government to consider measures, including legal measures, that would protect journalists and other public watchdogs from abusive legal actions that are aimed at silencing them,” the organisations concluded. “Our democracy relies on their ability to hold power to account.”
The legal proceedings against Burgis, HarperCollins, and the FT were filed at the High Court of Justice of England and Wales on 27 August. The first hearing has yet to be scheduled.
Note to editors: ENRC was listed on the London Stock Exchange until 2013, when it became embroiled in controversy over governance issues and went private. Today it is owned by Eurasian Resources Group registered in Luxembourg. The ‘Trio’ who own the majority shares in ENRC (now ERG) are Alexander Machkevitch, Patokh Chodiev and Alijan Ibragimov. Mr Ibragimov died in February 2021. The Kazakh state owns an estimated 40 percent of the company.
SIGNED:
ARTICLE 19
Blueprint for Free Speech
Campaign for Freedom of Information in Scotland (CFoIS)
English PEN
IFEX
Index on Censorship
Justice for Journalists Foundation
Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project (OCCRP)
Osservatorio Balcani Caucaso Transeuropa (OBCT)
PEN International
Reporters Without Borders (RSF)
Rights and Accountability in Development (RAID)
Spotlight on Corruption
The Daphne Caruana Galizia Foundation
The European Centre for Press and Media Freedom
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]
29 Sep 21 | Angola, News and features, Portugal
[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]
Index on Censorship is extremely concerned at the lawsuit that has been filed against author and journalist Oliver Bullough (right). Bullough is being sued in Portugal by the vice president of Angola for €525,000 in relation to his award-winning non-fiction book, Moneyland.
The complaint relates to questions Bullough raised in his book about how Angola’s Vice President Bornito de Sousa Baltazar Diogo could have afforded to spend USD $200,000 on custom-made bridal wear for his daughter. De Sousa claimed that he paid for the dresses on his public servant’s salary, after the shopping spree was featured on the US reality TV show “Say Yes to the Dress”.
“We need investigative journalism to hold power to account. How can journalists be expected do this if they are being subject to aggressive legal claims in plaintiff-friendly jurisdictions?” said Jessica Ní Mhainín, Policy and Campaigns Manager at Index on Censorship. “Bullough is being sued for more than half a million Euro in a jurisdiction he has never before set foot in, for publishing information that is clearly in the public interest.”
Bullough’s Portuguese publisher, 20/20 Editora, is named as the second defendant in the lawsuit. Separately, de Sousa is suing Portuguese anti-corruption activist Paulo de Morais, co-founder of the Portuguese chapter of Transparency International, who recounted the purchases on Portuguese television.
Index on Censorship has filed a Council of Europe media freedom alert.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]
08 Jun 20 | Statements
[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]
The problem: gag lawsuits against public interest defenders
The EU must end gag lawsuits used to silence individuals and organisations that hold those in positions of power to account. Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation (SLAPP) are lawsuits brought forward by powerful actors (e.g. companies, public officials in their private capacity, high profile persons) to harass and silence those speaking out in the public interest. Typical victims are those with a watchdog role, for instance: journalists, activists, informal associations, academics, trade unions, media organisations and civil society organisations.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column width=”3/4″][vc_column_text]Recent examples of SLAPPs include PayPal suing SumOfUs for a peaceful protest outside PayPal’s German headquarters; co-owners of Malta’s Satabank suing blogger Manuel Delia for a blog post denouncing money laundering at Satabank; and Bollore Group suing Sherpa and ReAct in France to stop them from reporting human rights abuses in Cameroon. In Italy more than 6,000 or two-thirds of defamation lawsuits filed against journalists and media outlets annually are dismissed as meritless by a judge. When Maltese journalist Daphne Caruana Galizia was brutally killed, there were 47 SLAPPs pending against her.
(Index has recently published a comprehensive review of the laws being used to silence journalists – click on the report cover to the right to read it.)[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][vc_column width=”1/4″][vc_single_image image=”113782″ img_size=”full” onclick=”custom_link” img_link_target=”_blank” link=”https://www.indexoncensorship.org/campaigns/the-laws-being-used-to-silence-media/”][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]SLAPPs are a threat to the EU legal order, and, in particular:
● A threat to democracy and fundamental rights. The EU is founded on the rule of law and respect for human rights. SLAPPs impair the right to freedom of expression, to public participation and to assembly of those who speak out in the public interest, and have a chilling effect on the exercise of these rights by the community at large.
● A threat to access to justice and judicial cooperation. Cross-border judicial cooperation relies on the principles of effective access to justice across the Union and mutual trust between legal systems. That trust must be based on the legally enforceable upholding of common values and minimum standards. To the extent that they distort and abuse the system of civil law remedies, SLAPPs undermine the mutual trust between EU legal systems: member states must be confident that rulings issued by other member states’ courts are not the result of abusive legal strategies and are adopted as the outcome of genuine proceedings.
● A threat to the enforcement of EU law, including in connection to the internal market and the protection of the EU budget. The effective enforcement of EU law, including the proper
functioning of the internal market, depends on the scrutiny of the behaviour of individual entities by the EU, member states and – crucially – informed individuals. Watchdogs, be it media or civil society actors, play a key enforcement role. Therefore, the absence of a system which safeguards public scrutiny is a threat to the enforcement of EU law. The same reasoning applies to the management of EU programmes and budget, which cannot be monitored through the sole vigilance of the European Commission.
● A threat to freedom of movement. The absence of rules to protect watchdogs from SLAPP has an impact on the exercise of the Treaty’s fundamental freedoms, since it affects the ability of media, civil society organisations and information services providers to confidently operate in jurisdictions where the risk of SLAPPs is higher, and discourages people from working for organisations where they can be the target of SLAPPs.
The solution: an EU set of anti-SLAPP measures
The EU can and must end SLAPPs by adopting the following complementary measures to protect all
those affected by SLAPPs:
1. An anti-SLAPP directive
An anti-SLAPP directive is needed to establish a Union-wide minimum standard of protection against SLAPPs, by introducing exemplary sanctions to be applied to claimants bringing abusive lawsuits, procedural safeguards for SLAPP victims, including special motions to contest the admissibility of certain claims and/or rules making the burden shifting to the plaintiff to demonstrate a reasonable probability of succeeding in such claims, as well as other types of preventive measures. The Whistle-Blower Directive sets an important precedent protecting those who report a breach of Union law in a work-related context. Now the EU must ensure a high standard of protection against gag lawsuits for everyone who speaks out – irrespective of the form and the context – in the public interest.
The legal basis for an anti-SLAPP directive is to be found in multiple provisions of the Treaty; for example, Article 114 TFEU on the proper functioning of the internal market, Article 81 TFEU on judicial cooperation and effective access to justice and Article 325 TFEU on combating fraudrelated to EU programmes and budgets.
2. The reform of Brussels I and Rome II Regulations
Brussels I Regulation (recast) contains rules which grant claimants the ability to choose where to make a claim. This must be amended to end forum shopping in defamation cases, which forces defendants to hire and pay for defence in countries whose legal systems are unknown to them and where they are not based. This is beyond the means of most and falls foul of the principles of fair trial and equality of arms.
Rome II Regulation does not regulate which national law will apply to a defamation case. This allows claimants to select the most favourable substantive law and therefore leads to a race to the bottom. Today, victims may be subject to the lowest standard of freedom of expression applicable to their case.
3. Support all victims of SLAPPs
Funds are needed to morally and financially support all victims of SLAPPs, especially with legal defence. Justice Programme funds should be used to train judges and practitioners, and a system to publicly name and shame the companies that engage in SLAPPs, for example in an EU register, should be created.
Finally, the EU must ensure that the scope of anti-SLAPP measures include everybody affected by SLAPPs, including journalists, activists, trade unionists, academics, digital security researchers, human rights defenders, media and civil society organisations, among others.
This paper was signed by the following 116 organisations
Abalone Alliance Safe Energy Clearinghouse
Access Info Europe
Access Now
ActionAid International
Adéquations
Amigas de la Tierra
Amis de la Terre France
ANTICOR
ARTICLE 19
Association Justice and Environment, z.s.
Bruno Manser Fonds
Terre Solidaire (CCFD)
CEE Bankwatch Network
Centre for Free Expression
Citizens Network Watchdog Poland
Civil Liberties Union for Europe
Civil Rights Defenders
Civil Society Europe
Clean Air Action Group (Hungary)
Committee to Protect Journalists
Common Weal
Consumer Association the Quality of Life
(EKPIZO)
Corporate Europe Observatory
Defend Democracy
European Digital Rights (EDRi)
Electronic Frontier Foundation
Environmental Partnership Association
ePaństwo Foundation
Environmental Paper Network International
(EPN)
Estonian Forest Aid / Eesti Metsa Abiks
ETC Group
Eurocadres / Council of European Professional
and Managerial Staff
European Center for Not-for-Profit Law
European Centre for Press and Media Freedom
European Civic Forum
European Coalition for Corporate Justice
European Coordination Via Campesina
European Environmental Bureau (EEB)
European Federation of Journalists
European Federation of Public Service Unions
(EPSU)
European Trade Union Confederation (ETUC)
Fern
Fitug
Forest Initiatives and Communities
Forum Ökologie & Papier
FOUR PAWS International
Free Press Unlimited
Friends of the Earth Europe
Friends of the Earth Nuclear Network
Friends of the Siberian Forests
Fundacja Otwarty Plan
Fundacja Strefa Zieleni
Global Justice Ecology Project
GM Watch
Gong
Government Accountability Project
Green Light Foundation
Greenpeace EU Unit
Homo Digitalis
IFEX
Index on Censorship
Institute for Sustainable Development
Institute of Water Policy
International Corporate Accountability
Roundtable (ICAR)
International Press Institute (IPI)
Iraqi Journalists Right Defence Association
JEF Europe
Jordens Vänner
Journalismfund.eu
Justice Pesticides
Legal Human Academy
Maison des Lanceurs d’Alerte
Mighty Earth
Milieudefensie / Friends of the Earth
Netherlands
MultiWatch
NGO Neuer Weg
NGO Shipbreaking Platform
Nuclear Consulting Group
Ending Gag Lawsuits in Europe – Protecting Democracy and Fundamental Rights 4
Nuclear Transparency Watch
OGM dangers
On ne se taira pas (We will not remain silent)
Osservatorio Balcani e Caucaso Transeuropa
PEN International
Polish Ecological Club Mazovian Branch
Polish Ecological Club Pomeranian Branch
Polish Institute for Human Rights and Business
Protection International
RECLAIM
Reporters Without Borders
Rettet den Regenwald e.V.
Salva la Selva
Sciences Citoyennes
Sherpa
Society for Threatened Peoples Switzerland
SOLIDAR
SOMO
Stowarzyszenie Ekologiczno-Kulturalne
Wspólna Ziemia / Common Earth
SumOfUs
The Daphne Caruana Galizia Foundation
The Ethicos Group
The Good Lobby
The Signals Network
Transnational Institute
Transparency International EU
Umweltinstitut München e.V.
Vouliwatch
Vrijschrift
vzw Climaxi
Chceme zdravú krajinu / We want a healthy
country
WeMove Europe
Whistleblower Network Germany
Whistleblowing International Network (WIN)
WildLeaks / Earth League International
Women Engage for a Common Future (WECF)
XNet
Zielone Wiadomości[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]
