Strategic litigation against public involvement is big businesses’ go-to threat against journalists and activists who expose their unethical practices. A recent ruling by the Supreme Court upholding the IPC’s defamation laws is a blow for those who promote free speech. Any editor who is well-informed will tell you that publishing journalism that focuses on the wealthy and powerful is hazardous and invariably results in a prolonged court battle.

In addition to being pressured to delete reports and apologize, the journalist in question must defend himself against a number of legal actions and defamation notices.In other words, individuals who dare to reveal high-level corruption wear the crown of unease.

Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation, or SLAPP, is the abbreviation meaning a SLAPP lawsuit often has no validity since it “is meant to frighten and silence” a party from exercising their right to free expression by making them pay for a legal defense up until the point when they stop criticizing or opposing the plaintiff.

The idea of a SLAPP case originated in the US, when it was discovered that certain lawsuits were brought against individuals or groups of litigants who publicly expressed their concerns about significant or essential societal issues. Such lawsuits were filed with the intention of silencing the defendants from exercising their right to free expression while also placing a financial burden on the individual or group plaintiffs via the cost of...

Read Full Story: https://news.google.com/__i/rss/rd/articles/CBMiQGh0dHBzOi8vd3d3LmludmVudGl2Y...