The Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation Bill 2026 is intended to implement Directive (EU) 2024/1069 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 April 2024 on protecting persons who engage in public participation from manifestly unfounded claims or abusive court proceedings.

Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation (SLAPPs) are legal actions used by powerful entities to intimidate and silence critics. The goal is not to win, but to burden defendants with prolonged legal battles, high costs, and psychological strain.

The Environmental Pillar takes particular interest in the issue of SLAPPs because of their use against environmental groups.  They state that it is important that the legislation is robust and fit for purpose to protect activists, campaigners and journalists.

The Environmental Pillar would like to see a number of amendments to the legislation as it stands:

The section on the use in bad faith of procedural tactics should be expanded to include:

• the filing of excessive or protracted procedural motions such as discovery or interrogatories;
• the filing of large amounts of non-relevant documentation during the case or in response to orders;
• the existence of any proceedings, complaints to non-judicial forums, complaints mechanisms, administrative tribunals or regulatory bodies between the parties or by the claimant which were unsubstantiated, dismissed or found to be abusive, or which are running concurrently.

Public participation should be expanded to include:

• Promoting or engaging in journalistic, political, scientific, academic, artistic, commentary or satirical communications, publications or works;
• the exercise of the right to good administration and the right to an effective remedy, such as the filing of or assistance in filing of complaints, petitions or administrative and judicial claims,
• organising or participating in research, surveys, boycotts, campaigns or any other collective actions,
• making or organising submissions or observations on any public consultation process.

Information to be given to court should include information on whether the plaintiff has planning applications in being and whether the defendant has exercised their right to engage in public participation in commenting on the plaintiffs planning application/s; and whether the plaintiff has alleged unauthorised developments and whether the defendant has highlighted alleged unauthorised developments to the appropriate authority/s or where the defendant has exercised their right to pursue separate enforcement proceedings through the courts;

The use of conflicting definitions in sections 8 and 9 creates confusion as to the grounds and threshold for dismissal which will create a barrier to using this legislation as intended.

Environmental Pillar would like to see a new section added to the stay on proceedings pending determination of dismissal motion. In order to protect the rights of a victim of an abusive lawsuit, it is important to ensure no further costs are allowed to be incurred in the proceedings until the strike out application is determined, and that related proceedings be stayed also.

In order to further protect the rights of a victim, it is imperative that safeguards are inserted to focus on enablers of abusive litigation and we feel that the court should have regard to the conduct of any lawyer who enabled litigation, which a judge may consider abusive, gratuitous, intimidator or any other conduct, which may be considered to be an abuse of their professional standing.

Free speech and the ability to hold powerful interests to account is a cornerstone of any democracy. It is important that SLAPP legislation adequately protects citizens, campaigners and the media from lengthy, costly and intimidating legal proceedings which are being used to silence them.