Committee
Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee 04 October 2023
04 Oct 2023 · S6 · Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee
Item of business
Continued Petitions
Strategic Lawsuits against Public Participation (PE1975)
Our next petition, PE1975, which was lodged by Roger Mullin, calls on the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish Government to review and amend the law to prevent the use of strategic lawsuits against public participation, which have the unfortunate acronym of SLAPPs. We previously considered the petition at our meeting on 18 January, when the committee agreed to write to the Scottish Law Commission, the Law Society of Scotland, the National Union of Journalists, the Scottish Newspaper Society and the Scottish Government. The Scottish Law Commission has confirmed that it does not have any current work in its programme of law reform that is relevant to the petition. The Minister for Community Safety’s written submission noted that, although defamation is not the only type of proceeding that is used for this purpose, it “is the most common route to silence or intimidate.” The submission details enhanced legal protections that have been brought about by the Defamation and Malicious Publication (Scotland) Act 2021, particularly the ability for unfounded proceedings to be dismissed at an early procedural hearing in relevant circumstances. The Law Society of Scotland points out that, between 2013 and 2021, when the threshold to bring defamation action was lower in Scotland than it was in England and Wales, there was not a significant increase in the number of cases brought in Scotland. It highlights work that is being undertaken by the Council of Europe to develop a draft recommendation on SLAPPs, with the working group concluding its work by December 2023. The National Union of Journalists states that threats of legal action often act as an effective deterrent and go unreported, which means that the true scale of the issue “cannot easily be captured.” The NUJ argues that the statutory definition of SLAPPs must be broad in order to cover the wide range of tactics deployed. The anti-SLAPP research hub’s written submission points to the UK Government’s consultation, which observed that protection through a serious harm test or public interest defence in defamation cases comes too late in proceedings to deter abusive litigation. The petitioner’s written submission describes the Scottish Government’s response as “complacent” and states that “SLAPPs cannot be judged solely on the basis of those cases that come to court.” His most recent submission highlights some of the on-going work that is being done to increase engagement on the call for Scottish anti-SLAPP legislation. After that rather extended summary, do members have any comments or suggestions for action?
In the same item of business
The Convener
Con
Our next petition, PE1975, which was lodged by Roger Mullin, calls on the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish Government to review and amend the law to ...
Fergus Ewing
SNP
We should take evidence from the petitioner, the anti-SLAPP research hub, the Law Society of Scotland and the Minister for Victims and Community Safety. In a...
The Convener
Con
The petitioner, Roger Mullin, is with us in the public gallery today. We will seek to take evidence from him, the anti-SLAPP research hub, the Law Society of...
The Convener
Con
We will keep the petition open and seek to hold an evidence session at a subsequent committee meeting, as agreed.