Eco-SLAPPs are defined as abusive lawsuits filed by powerful individuals or legal entities against citizens or collective groups defending the environment and public space, with the purpose of intimidation and silencing. Given the concerning rise in cases bearing these characteristics, the Hellenic League for Human Rights, with the support of the Heinrich Böll Foundation – Thessaloniki Office, produced the first study which systematically investigates eco-SLAPPs in Greece. The entirety of the research and its findings are available in Greek.
In recent years, a somewhat ironic acronym has become increasingly prevalent in public discourse: the term "SLAPP," which sounds like the word "slap," is actually an abbreviation for the term “Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation.” The term began to be used in the 1980s by professors at the University of Denver to describe lawsuits that lack—wholly or partially—a genuine legal basis but are filed with the purpose of intimidating defendants and preventing their participation in public discourse or criticism of powerful actors.
SLAPPs are, in a sense, indeed legal slaps in which powerful individuals and legal entities engage in order to silence criticism or complaints against them within the framework of public discourse. Very often these legal slaps take the form of lawsuits, but contemporary research has revealed that they can also take the form of criminal complaints, legal notices, or other exhausting legal proceedings, even state prosecutions, which all share some common core elements: on one hand, the abuse of the right on access to justice by the claimant, and on the other hand, the intimidation as well as the psychological and economic exhaustion of the defendant. In conclusion, to characterize legal proceedings as SLAPPs, three criteria must usually be met: a) the dispute must concern a matter of public interest, b) abusive legal tactics must be employed, and c) there is an imbalance of power and/or resources between claimants and defendants.
SLAPPs and the environment
Nevertheless, what connection may SLAPPs have with the environment or commons? The answer can be summarized as follows: soil, water, or atmospheric pollution; destruction or degradation of natural resources and biodiversity; noise pollution; restriction of access to public or protected spaces and their use for commercial exploitation or similar purposes; land grabbing—these are only some of the practices which, violating Greek environmental legislation, are often conducted by powerful individuals and legal entities for profit or other self-serving purposes. Thus, the environment frequently becomes the ground for legal proceedings driven by these powerful businesses or other interests against citizens, journalists, activists or collectivities that attempt to defend the protection or public character of these commons. These legal proceedings are what we describe as "eco-SLAPPs."
Following closely the court reporting in recent years—certainly not from the mainstream Greek media outlets — one can identify a peculiar pattern: places in Greece's most beautiful regions, such as Monemvasia, Pindos, Rhodes, Syros, Ios, Tinos, Chalkidiki, and Lefkada—from popular tourist destinations are transformed into sets of Kafkaesque scenes, where local communities and residents become victims of abusive legal practices simply because they dare to defend their places against the few who defend their own - usually of economic nature - interests, at the expense of the public interest.
Violation of fundamental rights
This pattern calls for particular attention, since these cases do not constitute merely ordinary legal disputes between private parties: rather, they raise questions on the rule of law and the limitation or even violation of fundamental rights. SLAPPs violate freedom of expression, functioning as a tool of censorship aimed at "silencing" the defendant—that is, restricting or even entirely blocking their right to address a matter of public interest in the manner they deem appropriate. Simultaneously, two other rights closely connected to freedom of expression are violated: freedom of information and freedom of the press. When a person's right to freedom of expression is restricted, it logically follows that their right to transmit their information or ideas (freedom of information) is also restricted, and correspondingly the public's right to be informed through their publication (freedom of the press) is also compromised.
Beyond the above, the practice of SLAPPs violates a range of other rights, such as the free development of personality (as victims are exhausted psychologically, morally, and economically) and the right to a fair trial (due to the imbalance of power and resources between claimants and defendants).At the same time, there is an abuse of public resources through the judicial proceedings required for the adjudication (or even dismissal) of cases which, as we have noted, are not aimed at the genuine protection or exercise of a right, but at the prevention, limitation, or punishment of public participation in matters of public interest.
Eco-SLAPPs, indeed, come to violate these fundamental rights, since the "perpetrators" have firstly caused environmental degradation through their actions or omissions, despite the protection of the environment as foreseen in Article 24 of the Greek Constitution, as well as by Greek and EU environmental legislation. This intensifies the reprehensibility of eco-SLAPPs, which silence the criticism against practices that in one way or another undermine life, health, public space, and/or other rights of citizens and their environment.
Legislation and solidarity
It is clear that the increasing frequency of SLAPPs - including eco-SLAPPs - leads to a shift of the field of public interest disputes from public dialogue to the courtroom, contrary to democratic fundamentals, such as consultation and residents' participation in matters affecting their region—elements that constitute the foundation of a rule of law state that responds to society's needs and priorities.
In this sense, it is evident that for the protection of both the individuals that are subjected to these abusive legal practices and of the quality of democracy as a whole, the need for immediate legislation to tackle SLAPPs is urgent. The mere incorporation of EU Directive 2024/1069 is insufficient, as it applies exclusively to cases with cross-border implications and will not help address SLAPPs where the disputants are residents in the same member-state - which are the majority of cases. For this reason, beyond the mandatory transposition of the European Directive, the full adoption of both Recommendation 2022/758 and the Recommendation of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe is necessary, as they foresee effective protection against SLAPP at the national level too.
However, the protection of individuals targeted by SLAPPs is not only a matter of legislative measures. As highlighted in the relevant research of the Hellenic League for Human Rights, active solidarity with those targeted by SLAPPs is also extremely effective as - against fear and isolation -solidarity constitutes a catalytic factor for empowerment, resilience, and endurance.
Looking toward the strengthening of the rule of law and democratic institutions, we must contribute to the elimination of legal or any other practices that threaten fundamental rights and public discourse. Practical solidarity with SLAPP victims and advocating for effective legislation regarding SLAPPs prevention are some of the first, vital and most obvious steps towards this direction.