21 Amendments of Magdalena ADAMOWICZ related to 2021/2036(INI)
Amendment 82 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas SLAPPs have become an increasingly widespread practice used against journalists, publishers, academics, civil society and NGOs, as demonstrated by many cases throughout the Union, such as the chilling case of investigative journalist Daphne Caruana Galizia, who was reportedly facing 47 civil and criminal defamation lawsuits, (resulting in the freezing of her assets) on the day of her strongly condemned assassination on 16 October 2017, and the lawsuits her heirs continue to face; whereas other illustrative and alarming cases against independent journalists and media include Realtid Media, which was repeatedly threatened with a lawsuit in a different jurisdiction from where the reporting in question took place, and Gazeta Wyborcza, which continues to be sued by a number of public entities and officials on a regular basis;
Amendment 91 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)
Recital C a (new)
C a. whereas SLAPPs are frequently used by public authorities or its proxies such as state-funded media outlets, state funded NGOs or state-owned companies;
Amendment 94 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital C b (new)
Recital C b (new)
C b. whereas SLAPPing can be a tool to reduce media pluralism at the systemic level, by exercising a chilling effect on independent media;
Amendment 112 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital D a (new)
Recital D a (new)
Amendment 129 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Highlights that SLAPPs are a direct attack on the exercise of fundamental rights and freedoms; underlines that fundamental rights and democracy are linked to upholding the rule of law, and that undermining media freedom and public democratic participation threatens Union values as enshrined in Article 2 of the TEU; welcomes the fact that the rule of law report includes SLAPP lawsuits in its assessment of media freedom and pluralism across the Union, and points to best practices in countering them; calls for the annual report to include a thorough assessment of the legal environment for the media, and investigative journalism in particular, and to look more thoroughly at challenges affecting civil society and chilling effect that SLAPPs can have on it;
Amendment 152 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Emphasises that public participation also has an important role to play in the proper functioning of the internal market, as it is often through public participation that breaches of Union law, corruption and other unlawful practices threatening the proper functioning of the internal market are made known to the public;
Amendment 163 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Points out that SLAPPs constitute a misuse of Member States’ justice systems and legal frameworks, especially for successfully addressing ongoing common challenges outlined in the Justice Scoreboard, such as caseload administration and case backlogs; recalls that a properly functioning justice system delivers judgements without undue delay, and manages judicial resources so as to maximise efficiency, and that this is only possible where judges and judicial bodies are not burdened with the handling of unfounded claims that are later on dismissed as abusive and lacking in legal merit;
Amendment 180 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Highlights that in recent years online hate speech has become increasingly widespread against journalists, NGOs, rights defenders, academics and other civil society actors, including those defending LGBTQI rights, thus threatening media freedom, freedom of expression and assembly, as well as public safety given that online hate speech can incite real- world violence;
Amendment 189 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Stresses that SLAPPs are often meritless, frivolous or based on exaggerated claims, and that they are not initiated for the purposes of obtaining a favourable judicial outcome but rather only to intimidate, harass, tire out, put psychological pressure on or consume the financial resources of journalists, publishers, academics, civil society and NGOs, with the ultimate objective of blackmailing and forcing them into silence through the judicial procedure itself; stresses that SLAPPs cause not only financial burden but also bear dire psychological consequences for their targets as well as their family members, aggravated by the fact that the letter may also inherit those abusive proceedings upon the target’s death, as it happened to the husband and sons of investigative journalist Daphne Caruana Galizia; points out that this chilling effect can lead to self-censorship, suppressing participation in democratic life, and also discourages others from similar actions, from entering into these professions or from proceeding with relevant associated activities;
Amendment 227 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Stresses, with regard to this problem, that all Member States lack harmonised minimum standards to protect journalists, publishers, academics, civil society and NGOs and to ensure that fundamental rights are upheld in the Member States;
Amendment 252 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Agrees with the numerous academics, legal practitioners and victims who point to the need for legislative action against the growing problem of SLAPPs; urgently calls, therefore, for the Brussels I and Rome II Regulations to be amendmentsed in order to prevent ‘libel tourism’ or ‘forum shopping’; urgently calls for the introduction of a uniform choice of law rule for defamation, as well as for proposals for binding Union legislation on harmonised and effective safeguards for victims of SLAPPs across the Union, including through a directive; argues that without such legislative action, SLAPPs will continue to threaten the rule of law and the fundamental rights of freedom of expression, association, peaceful assembly and information in the Union; is concerned that if measures only address lawsuits regarding information, actions based on other civil matters or criminal procedures may still be used;
Amendment 259 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Affirms that legislative measures at Union level could be based on Article 81 of the TFEU (for cross-border civil lawsuits) and Article 82 of the TFEU (for threats ofcriminal lawsuits in cross-border cases), and separately on Article 114 of the TFEU to protect public participation in order to ensure the proper functioning of the internal market by exposing corruption and other distorunlawful actions; asserts that the latter measure could also address attemptsgenuine, present and sufficiently serious threats made in order to prevent investigation and reporting on breaches of Union law using the same legal base as Directive (EU) 2019/1937 (the ‘Whistleblower Directive’);
Amendment 277 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Considers that it is essential to adopt a legislative measure protecting the role of journalists, publishers, academics, civil society and NGOs in preventing breaches of Union law and ensuring the proper functioning of the internal market; urges the Commission to present a proposal for legislation that sets out safeguards for persons investigating and reporting on these matters of public interest;
Amendment 292 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Urges the Commission to present a proposal for a measure that develops judicial cooperation in civil matters so as to address cross-border SLAPP cases by providing for rules on the dismissal of abusive lawsuits and other actions in court that have the clear purpose of preventing public participation, which should include sanctions, consideration of abusive motives even if the lawsuit or action is not dismissed, costs and damages; calls on the Commission, further, to address questions giving rise to forum shopping and libel tourism in a forthcoming review of the Brussels I and Rome II Regulations;
Amendment 307 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Declares that the protection of legitimate rights arising from Union law must be ensured by Member State courts and cannot be jeopardised, including the rights which are routinely cited in abusive lawsuits; defends at the same time and without prejudice to such protectionunderlines, therefore, that the anti-SLAPP measures should be without prejudice to legitimate court actions and claimants' right of access to justice; defends at the same time, that it is necessary to prevent any abusive use of those rights in a manner which is manifestly contrary to the legislators’ intention when conferring them upon natural or legal persons; considers that, to that end, safeguards are needed not only in order to protect the victims of SLAPPs, but also to prevent and sanction the abuse and/or misuse of those safeguards provided against SLAPPs; notes that preventing such abuse is equally necessary for the correct and uniform application of Union law, thereby safeguarding its effectiveness;
Amendment 321 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Underlines the urgent need for a robust fund for supporting victims of SLAPPs; stresses the importance for victims and potential victims of SLAPPs to have easy and accessible information about these type of cases, legal aid and support, as well as psychological support;
Amendment 327 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Considers it necessary to collect data on SLAPP cases and raise awareness about the nature and detrimental effects of SLAPPs;
Amendment 354 #
Motion for a resolution
Annex – point 1 – part II – indent 3
Annex – point 1 – part II – indent 3
the creation of a specific Union fund to provide financial support to victims of SLAPPs, including in terms of financial aid, legal assistance and psychological support;
Amendment 354 #
Motion for a resolution
Annex – point 1 – part II – indent 3
Annex – point 1 – part II – indent 3
the creation of a specific Union fund to provide financial support to victims of SLAPPs, including in terms of financial aid, legal assistance and psychological support;
Amendment 426 #
Motion for a resolution
Annex – point 4 – point b
Annex – point 4 – point b
(b) specify that prosecution cannot be used to silence journalists, publishers, academics, civil society and NGOs;
Amendment 426 #
Motion for a resolution
Annex – point 4 – point b
Annex – point 4 – point b
(b) specify that prosecution cannot be used to silence journalists, publishers, academics, civil society and NGOs;