De afkorting ‘SLAPPS’ (strategic lawsuit against public participation) [1] wordt gebruikt voor de juridische intimidatie van journalisten en not-for-profit organisaties. Volgens het gisteren besproken grondrechtenrapport over Nederland (pdf) van NJCM c.s. is in Nederland op grootschalige wijze sprake van intimidatie van journalisten [2]. Er wordt het voorbeeld van zakenman Willem Blijdorp aangehaald en er over geklaagd dat hij een bodemprocedure tegen het FD startte, in plaats van te kiezen voor een kort geding.

De praktijk leert dat journalisten soms onzorgvuldige artikelen publiceren waarin onjuiste informatie over mensen of organisaties is opgenomen. Slachtoffers met weinig geld laten het over zich heen komen. Als er wel geld is, wordt er soms voor gekozen om de journalist of zijn medium juridisch aan te pakken om het artikel gecorrigeerd te krijgen.

Gaan de anti-SLAPP maatregelen er nu voor zorgen dat dit niet meer mag?

Zoals de rapporteurs ook melden is er Europese regelgeving in aantocht. Ik ben benieuwd hoe daarin wordt omgegaan met de legitieme verlangens van slachtoffers van onjuiste mediaberichten.

Noten

[1] Lees wat wikipedia er over schrijft.

[2] Tekst uit het rapport: “In March 2023, the Dutch National Association for Journalists and PersVeilig published a research on the legal intimidation of journalists in the Netherlands that shows almost 50% of journalists, and over 90% of editors have been legally intimidated due to a publication. The chilling effect of this is that journalists are more careful with publishing, adapt publications, or sometimes refrain from publishing at all.
Furthermore, the Coalition Against SLAPPs in Europe (CASE), the Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR), and the Dutch National Association for Journalists identified and deplored a current SLAPP in the Netherlands: a case against Het Financieele Dagblad by business owner Willem Blijdorp that was initiated in April 2023. The organizations argued this case to be a SLAPP due to the abusive tactics that are being used. Blijdorp did not opt for summary or preliminary relief proceedings (kort geding), the common route in the Netherlands for cases legitimately aimed at limiting reputational damage following a publication, but instead started main proceedings (bodemprocedure, i.e. proceedings on the merits). These proceedings are much longer than a kort geding and will unnecessarily drive up the legal costs for Het Financieele Dagblad. Blijdorp also asked the journalists to present all their sources to the court. In addition, Blijdorp claims an excessive amount of €150,000 for non-material damages, while material damages will be calculated in separate proceedings. In a concerning development on June 20, 2023, Blijdorp filed a petition to summon witnesses, including the journalist and possible sources. Furthermore, several sources received letters from Blijdorp’s lawyers – prior to the lawsuit – requesting them to urgently clarify which information the FD provided to them before giving their testimony.
Despite the concerning results from the survey, several ongoing SLAPP cases, as well as concerns in Parliament, the Dutch government has yet to start an investigation into the number and scale of SLAPPs in the Netherlands (this was supposed to start in 2019). Furthermore, the Dutch government has not yet announced any anti-SLAPP / anti legal intimidation measures to address this rising concern for the safety of journalists, aside from transpositioning the EU Anti-SLAPP Directive that will be officially adopted in 2024.
Finally, slander and defamation remain punishable under the Dutch Criminal Code as well as Dutch Civil Code. This raises serious concern for the safety of journalists in the Netherlands. While in-depth research is needed on this, anecdotal evidence suggests that this does affect journalists and makes them the subject of criminal investigations.“