CASE tells Malta to finish the law

The Coalition Against SLAPPs in Europe wrote to Abela on the ninth anniversary of Daphne Caruana Galizia’s assassination, urging his government to extend protection beyond cross-border cases and to abolish the inheritance of libel suits, according to Newsbook.

CASE tied that appeal directly to the legal pressure Caruana Galizia faced before her death. Newsbook reported that she had 43 civil and five criminal libel cases pending at the time, and that her family inherited those proceedings.

That is the sharp point in this dispute. Malta can say, accurately, that it legislated early. Legal Notice 177 of 31 July 2024 transposed the EU Anti-SLAPP Directive, often called “Daphne’s Law.” But Newsbook said the Maltese version was criticised as a “bare minimum” implementation because it only covers cross-border cases, leaving domestic ones outside the law’s protection.

So the argument is no longer about whether Malta has acted. It has. The argument is about what kind of action this was. A state can move first and still choose a narrow shield.

According to Newsbook, the European Commission and the Council of Europe had explicitly recommended broader protection including domestic cases. Other member states, including Poland, Belgium and France, did so. Malta did not. That reads less like some hidden drafting accident than a decision about how far government was willing to go.

CASE also targeted another feature of Maltese libel law that has never stopped sounding punitive even when described in procedural terms: inherited cases. The coalition wants an end to the practice that forced Caruana Galizia’s family to keep fighting actions filed against her while they were mourning.

The law’s deterrent power also appears limited. Newsbook reported that penalties are capped at €10,000, which critics say is unlikely to deter wealthy individuals or corporations. It also said Nationalist Party amendments to extend the law to domestic cases and raise penalties were voted down by the government.

CASE pointed to a pending media reform bill, reportedly due in the coming weeks, as the obvious place to fix the omissions. Until there is text, though, the position remains plain enough: Malta has an anti-SLAPP law, but on Newsbook’s account it still leaves the majority of cases involving Malta outside its protection.