28/10/2026
In recent years, politicians and corporations have used court cases to chill the work of journalists, activists, and NGOs. Italy is the worst offender in Europe, with the highest number of documented SLAPPs; these are Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation. Their goal is to intimidate and silence civil society actors.
The Good Lobby Italia, together with CASE Italia, promptly encouraged the Italian government to transpose the EU Anti-SLAPP Directive (Directive (EU) 2024/1069), the first instrument of its kind.
The directive gives people targeted by abusive lawsuits three main tools: the right to ask a court to dismiss a manifestly unfounded claim early, protection against financial pressure (security for costs, cost recovery and penalties for abusive claimants), and protection against judgments from non-EU courts. But it is only a minimum standard, and it binds only in civil cases with a cross-border dimension. Member states are free to go further, and the Commission and the Council of Europe have urged them to do so.
Despite the government transposing this text, the protection afforded remains suboptimal:
- The Italian anti-SLAPP law provides protection only for cross-border civil cases. That is, it excludes purely national cases, which make up at least 90% of SLAPPs in the country.
- It leaves out criminal proceedings, even though defamation complaints are one of the most common intimidation tools used against journalists in Italy.
- It defines “cross-border” more narrowly than the directive, counting only cases where the claimant and the target reside in different states.
Why this matters at European level
This is not only an Italian story. The directive sets a minimum standard, and the European Commission’s 2022 Recommendation and the Council of Europe’s 2024 Recommendation both urge member states to extend safeguards to domestic cases and to all types of proceedings. According to CASE, only 8.5% of SLAPP cases in Europe have a cross-border element. A law that protects only those cases protects very few people. It does not have to be this way. France, for instance, has transposed the directive without distinguishing between domestic and cross-border situations.
The EU dimension runs deeper still. The directive is known as “Daphne’s law,” after Daphne Caruana Galizia, the Maltese journalist murdered in 2017 whose case galvanised the fight against abusive litigation. Most member states missed the 7 May 2026 transposition deadline, and in July the Commission opened infringement proceedings against Italy and 13 others. But timely transposition is not enough: it must reflect the directive’s purpose. Italy’s restrictive definition of “cross-border” raises questions about compatibility with EU law, so The Good Lobby Italia and CASE Italia will bring the text to the European Commission for review.
Umbrellas with holes in Rome
On 22 October, The Good Lobby Italia and CASE Italia took to Piazza Capranica in Rome with punctured umbrellas: an ironic but bitter symbol of a law meant to shelter critical voices from baseless lawsuits, while still leaving journalists, activists, and whistleblowers exposed.
What we are calling for
- The Italian government and parliament: extend protections to national cases and criminal proceedings now.
- The European Commission: assess the Italian text’s compliance with the directive, starting with its definition of “cross-border,” and act on your findings.
- All EU member states: go beyond the minimum, because a SLAPP is a SLAPP, whichever side of a border it comes from.
- Citizens: sign and share the petition against gag lawsuits now.