What changed between the draft committee report and the plenary report

Removed:Recital 7: (7) Human rights defenders also play an important role in European democracies, especially in upholding fundamental rights, democratic values, social inclusion, environmental protection and the rule of law. They should be able to participate actively in public life, promote accountability and make their voice heard on policy matters and in decision-making processes without fear of intimidation. Human rights defenders refer to individuals or organisations engaged in defending fundamental rights and a variety of other rights, such as environmental and climate rights, women’s rights, LGBTQI+ rights, the rights of the people with a minority racial or ethnic background, labour rights or religious freedoms.

Added:Recital 4: (4) The purpose of this Directive is to provide for minimum rules at Union level in order to ensure the protection of natural and legal persons who engage in public participation on matters of public interest, including journalists, publishers, media organisations, whistleblowers and human rights defenders, as well as civil society organisations, NGOs, trade unions, artists, researchers and academics, against court proceedings initiated against them, as well as the threats thereof, to deter them from public participation (commonly referred to as strategic lawsuits against public participation or ‘SLAPPs’).

Removed:Recital 7 a (new): (7a) Participants in public debate, other than journalists, media organisations or human rights defenders, such as academics, researchers or artists, also deserve adequate protection. In a democratic society, they should be able to research, teach, learn, perform and communicate without fear of reprisal.

Added:Recital 5: (5) Journalists play an important role in facilitating public debate and in the imparting and reception of information, opinions and ideas. Independent, professional and responsible journalism, as well as access to pluralistic information, are key pillars of democracy. It is essential that journalists are afforded the necessary space to contribute to an open, free and fair debate and to counter disinformation, information manipulation and interference. Journalists should be able to conduct their activities effectively and without fear to ensure that citizens have access to a plurality of views in European democracies.

Removed:Recital 9: (9) To foster this environment, it is important to protect natural and legal persons from court proceedings against public participation. Such court proceedings are not initiated for the purpose of access to justice, but to silence public debate typically using harassment and intimidation.

Added:Recital 6: (6) Investigative journalists and media organisations in particular play a key role in uncovering and combating organised crime, abuse of power, corruption, fundamental rights violations and extremism. Their work carries particularly high risks and they are experiencing a growing number of attacks, killings, threats, intimidation and harassment. A robust system of safeguards and protection, including protection of their physical safety, is needed to enable investigative journalists to fulfil their crucial role as watchdogs on matters of public interest, without fear of punishment for searching for the truth and informing the public.

Removed:Recital 10: (10) SLAPPs are typically initiated by powerful entities, for example individuals, lobby groups, corporations, politicians and state organs. They often involve an imbalance of power between the parties, with the claimant having a more powerful financial or political position than the defendant. Although not being an indispensable component of such cases, where present, an imbalance of power significantly increases the harmful effects as well as the chilling effects of court proceedings against public participation.

Added:Recital 7: (7) Human rights defenders also play an important role in European democracies, especially in upholding fundamental rights, democratic values, social inclusion, environmental protection, gender equality and the rule of law. Considering the Union’s environmental and climate policies, attention should also be given to the protection of environmental rights defenders. Human rights defenders should be able to participate actively in public life, promote accountability and make their voice heard on policy matters and in decision-making processes without fear of intimidation. Human rights defenders refer to individuals or organisations engaged in defending fundamental rights and a variety of other rights, such as environmental and climate rights, women’s rights, LGBTIQ+ rights, the rights of the people with a minority racial or ethnic background, labour rights, or religious freedoms.

Removed:Recital 11: (11) Court proceedings against public participation may have an adverse impact on the credibility and reputation of natural and legal persons that engage in public participation and exhaust their financial and other resources. Because of such proceedings, the publication of information on a matter of public interest may be delayed or altogether avoided. The length of procedures and the financial pressure may have a chilling effect on natural and legal persons engaging in public participation. The existence of such practices may therefore have a deterrent effect on their work by contributing to self-censorship in anticipation of possible future court proceedings, which leads to the impoverishment of public debate to the detriment of society as a whole.

Added:Recital 7 a (new): (7a) Participants in public debate, other than journalists, media organisations or human rights defenders, such as academics, researchers or artists, also deserve adequate protection. In a democratic society, they should be able to research, teach, learn, perform and communicate without fear of reprisal. Academics and researchers contribute fundamentally to public discourse and dissemination of knowledge, as well as ensure that the democratic debate can take place on an informed basis and counter disinformation.

Removed:Recital 12: (12) Those targeted by court proceedings against public participation may face multiple cases simultaneously, sometimes initiated in several jurisdictions. Proceedings initiated in the jurisdiction of one Member State against a person resident in another Member State are usually more complex and costly for the defendant. Claimants in court proceedings against public participation may also use procedural tools to drive up the length and cost of the litigation, and bring cases in a jurisdiction they perceive to be favourable for their case, rather than to the court best placed to hear the claim. Such practices also place unnecessary and harmful burdens on national court systems and lead to misuse of their resources.

Added:Recital 9: (9) To foster this environment, it is important to protect natural and legal persons from court proceedings against public participation. Such court proceedings are not initiated for the purpose of access to justice, but to silence public debate and prevent investigation of and reporting on breaches of Union and national law, including corruption or other abusive practices typically using harassment and intimidation.

Removed:Recital 15 a (new): (15a) This Directive lays down minimum rules, thus enabling the Member States to adopt or maintain more favourable provisions to persons engaging in public participation, including national law establishing more effective procedural safeguards, such as a double penalty whereby, in full respect of the right to a fair trial, the court is able to not only award the costs or compensation to the defendant but also impose a penalty to be paid to the state by the claimant when it is clear that the litigation it commenced was vexatious, frivolous or in bad faith. The implementation of this Directive should not serve to justify any regression in relation to the level of protection that already exists in each Member State.

Added:Recital 10: (10) SLAPPs are typically initiated by powerful entities, for example individuals, lobby groups, corporations, public officials, publicly controlled entities, politicians, judicial authorities and state organs in an attempt to silence public debate. They often involve an imbalance of power between the parties, with the claimant having a more powerful financial or political position than the defendant. Although not being an indispensable component of such cases, where present, an imbalance of power significantly increases the harmful effects as well as the chilling effects of court proceedings against public participation.

Removed:Recital 18: (18) The notion of a matter of public interest should include also quality, safety or other relevant aspects of goods, products or services where such matters are relevant to public health, safety, the environment, climate, consumer and labour rights or enjoyment of fundamental rights. A purely individual dispute between a consumer and a manufacturer or a service provider concerning a good, product or service should be covered only when the matter contains an element of public interest, for instance concerning a product or service which fails to comply with environmental or safety standards.

Added:Recital 11: (11) Court proceedings against public participation may have an adverse impact on the credibility and reputation of natural and legal persons that engage in public participation and exhaust their financial and other resources. Because of such proceedings, the publication of information on a matter of public interest may be delayed or altogether avoided. The length of procedures and the financial pressure may have a chilling effect on natural and legal persons that engage in public participation. The existence of such practices may therefore have a deterrent effect on their work by contributing to self-censorship in anticipation of possible future court proceedings, which leads to the impoverishment of public debate to the detriment of society as a whole.

Removed:Recital 20: (20) The imbalance of power between the parties which is characteristic of SLAPPs typically derives from the exploitation of economic advantage and political influence by the claimant against the defendant. Other indicators for abusive court proceedings involve litigation tactics used in bad faith such as delaying proceedings, initiating multiple proceedings on similar matters, causing disproportionate costs to the defendant in the proceedings or forum shopping. The past conduct of the claimant and, in particular, any history of legal intimidation should also be considered when determining whether the court proceedings are abusive in nature. These tactics are used by the claimant for other purposes than gaining access to justice. Such tactics are often, although not always, combined with various forms of intimidation, harassment or threats.

Added:Recital 12: (12) Those targeted by court proceedings against public participation may face multiple cases simultaneously, which can be civil, administrative or criminal or a combination of those, sometimes initiated in several jurisdictions. Proceedings initiated in the jurisdiction of one Member State against a person resident in another Member State are usually more complex and costly for the defendant. Claimants in court proceedings against public participation may also use procedural tools to drive up the length and cost of the litigation, and bring cases in a jurisdiction they perceive to be favourable for their case (forum shopping), rather than to the court best placed to hear the claim. The length and variety of procedures, the financial pressure and the threat of penalties, constitute powerful tools to intimidate and silence critical voices. Such practices also place unnecessary and harmful burdens on national court systems and lead to misuse of their resources, thus constituting an abuse of judicial systems.

Removed:Recital 22: (22) A matter should be considered to have cross-border implications unless both parties are domiciled in the same Member State as the court seised. Even where both parties are domiciled in the same Member State as the court seised, a matter should be considered to have cross-border implications in two other types of situations. The first situation is where the specific act of public participation is directly relevant to or accessible, via electronic means or otherwise, in more than one Member State. That includes for instance public participation in events organised by Union institutions, such as appearances in public hearings, or statements or activities on matters that are of specific relevance to more than one Member State, such as cross-border pollution or allegations of money laundering with potential cross-border involvement. An act of public participation should be considered to be accessible in more than one Member State, in particular, if it is carried out on the internet, for example in the case of social media campaigns or online media coverage. The ubiquitous nature of the internet warrants considering acts of public participation that are accessible in more than one Member State to be matters with cross-border implications. The effect of digital means of communication on the notion of cross-border elements has already been recognised in the case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union. The second situation where a matter should be considered to have cr…

Added:Recital 13: (13) The safeguards provided in this Directive should apply to any natural or legal person on account of their direct or indirect engagement in public participation. They should also protect natural or legal persons who, either on a professional or on a personal basis, support, assist or provide goods or services to another person for purposes directly linked to public participation on a matter of public interest. This involves for example lawyers, family members, internet providers, publishing houses or print shops, which face or are threatened with court proceedings for assisting, providing support or services to the person targeted with court proceedings.

Removed:Recital 22 a (new): (22a) Support should be available from the moment competent authorities become aware of the persons targeted by court proceedings against public participation and throughout the proceedings in accordance with the rights set out in this Directive. Support should be made available by a variety of means, including by providing comprehensive and independent information and advice, in a manner that is easily accessible to the public and free of charge, on procedures and remedies available, on protection against intimidation, harassment or threats of legal action, and on the rights of the person concerned, and by providing legal aid in cross-border civil proceedings, legal aid in further proceedings and legal counselling or other legal assistance which is deemed appropriate. Member States may provide for financial assistance and support measures, including psychological support, for those targeted by court proceedings against public participation.

Added:Recital 15: (15) The Directive does not apply to claims arising out of liability of the State for actions or omissions in the exercise of State authority (acta iure imperii) and claims against officials who act on behalf of the State and liability for acts of public authorities, including liability of publicly appointed office-holders, unless national law provides for it. In line with established case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union, court proceedings might still fall within the scope of ‘civil and commercial matters’ as referred to in this Directive where a State or a public body is a party, if the acts or omissions do not occur in the exercise of State authority.

Removed:Recital 25 a (new): (25a) Participation in proceedings against public participation exposes those targeted to particular psychological stress. The preparation for such proceedings and participation therein additionally ties up valuable resources of the defendants that they often do not have or that otherwise would have been invested in engaging in public participation. Such burden would be mitigated by allowing non-governmental organisations to take part or engage in the proceedings, either in support or on behalf of the defendant.

Added:Recital 15 a (new): (15a) This Directive lays down minimum rules, thus enabling the Member States to adopt or maintain provisions that are more favourable to persons engaging in public participation, including national law establishing more effective procedural safeguards, such as a double penalty whereby, in full respect of the right to a fair trial, the court is able to not only award the costs or compensation to the defendant but also impose a penalty to be paid to the State by the claimant when it is clear that the litigation it commenced was vexatious, frivolous or in bad faith. The implementation of this Directive should not serve to justify any regression in relation to the level of protection that already exists in each Member State.

Removed:Recital 29: (29) Courts or tribunals seised with an application for procedural safeguards, should act expeditiously in proceedings on the application, using the most expeditious procedures available under national law. To ensure high expediency in the accelerated procedure on an application for early dismissal, Member States should set time limits for the holding of hearings or for the court to take a decision. They may as well adopt schemes akin to procedures in relation to provisional measures. Member States should make efforts to ensure that when the defendant has applied for other procedural safeguards, the decision is also taken in an expeditious manner. For expeditious treatment, Member States could take into account, amongst others, whether the claimant has initiated multiple or concerted proceedings in similar matters and the existence of attempts to intimidate, harass or threat the defendant.

Added:Recital 16: (16) Public participation should mean any statement, activity or preparatory, supporting or assisting action directly linked thereto, by a natural or legal person expressed or carried out in the exercise of fundamental and human rights and freedoms such as right to freedom of expression and information on a matter of public interest, such as the creation, exhibition, advertisement or other promotion of journalistic, political, scientific, academic, artistic, commentary or satirical communications, publications or works, and any preparatory activities directly linked thereto. It can also include activities related to the exercise of academic and artistic freedom, the right to freedom of association and peaceful assembly, such as the organisation of or participation to lobbying activities, demonstrations and protests or activities resulting from the exercise of the right to good administration and the right to an effective remedy, such as the filing of complaints, petitions, administrative and judicial claims and participation in public hearings. Public participation should also include preparatory, supporting or assisting activities that have a direct and inherent link to the statement or activity in question and that are targeted to stifle public participation. In addition, it can cover other activities meant to inform or influence public opinion or to further action by the public, including activities by any private or public entity in relation to an issue of public interest…

Removed:Recital 31: (31) Costs should include all costs of the proceedings, including the full costs of legal representation incurred by the defendant unless such costs are excessive. Costs of legal representation exceeding amounts laid down in statutory fee tables should not be considered as excessive per se, but allow costs to be awarded in full, in accordance with national law. Where the national law does not provide for the full award of costs beyond statutory fees, the court should be able to award the full costs by whatever other means are available, in accordance with national law, including through the compensation of damages.

Added:Recital 18: (18) The notion of a matter of public interest should include matters relevant to the enjoyment of fundamental rights, including gender equality, protection from gender-based violence and non-discrimination, and the protection of the rule of law, media freedom and pluralism, and the environment. It should include also quality, safety or other relevant aspects of goods, products or services where such matters are relevant to public health, safety, the environment, climate, consumer and labour rights. A purely individual dispute between a consumer and a manufacturer or a service provider concerning a good, product or service should be covered only when the matter contains an element of public interest, for instance concerning a product or service which fails to comply with environmental or safety standards.

Removed:Recital 31 a (new): (31a) Full compensation for damage should include both material and immaterial damage, such as physical and psychological harm. In order for the defendant to be able to claim damages easily and in a timely manner, it should be possible to seek damages in the same proceedings as those brought against the defendant, where appropriate through a counter claim.

Added:Recital 19 a (new): (19a) Allegations of corruption, fraud, embezzlement, money laundering, extortion, coercion, sexual harassment and gender-based violence, or other forms of intimidation and criminality, or any other criminal or administrative offence, including financial criminality and environmental crime, qualify as matters of public interest. Activities aimed to protect the values enshrined in Article 2 TEU, the principle of non-interference in democratic processes, and providing or facilitating public access to information with a view to fighting disinformation also qualify as matters of public interest.

Removed:Recital 32 a (new): (32a) To ensure that the public can become aware of court decisions, Member States should establish a publicly accessible national register of relevant court decisions falling within the scope of this directive , in accordance with Union and national rules on the protection of personal data. The Commission should establish a publicly accessible Union register on the basis of the information from the registers of the Member States concerning relevant court decisions falling within the scope of this Directive, in accordance with Union rules on the protection of personal data.

Added:Recital 20: (20) The imbalance of power between the parties which is characteristic of SLAPPs typically derives from the misuse of economic advantage or political influence by the claimant against the defendant, together with the lack of legal merit. Other indicators for abusive court proceedings typically involve litigation tactics used in bad faith such as relying on one or more fully or partially unfounded claims, making excessive claims, delaying proceedings or discontinuing cases at a later stage of the proceedings, initiating multiple proceedings on similar matters, causing disproportionate costs to the defendant in the proceedings or forum shopping. The past conduct of the claimant and, in particular, any history of legal intimidation should also be considered when determining whether the court proceedings are abusive in nature. These tactics are used by the claimant for other purposes than gaining access to justice or genuinely exercising a right. Such tactics are often, although not always, combined with various forms of intimidation, harassment or threats.

Removed:Recital 33 a (new): (33a) As regards jurisdiction for defamation claims or other claims based on civil or commercial law which could constitute abusive court proceedings against public participation, the Member State of domicile of the defendant should be considered as the sole forum, having due regard to cases where the victims of defamation are private persons. With the exception of that rule concerning cases falling within the scope of this Directive, this Directive should not affect the application of Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council1a (‘Brussels I Regulation’). / 1a Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2012 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters (OJ L 351, 20.12.2012, p.1).

Added:Recital 20 a (new): (20a) Manifestly unfounded or abusive court proceedings against public participation are becoming more sophisticated and more effective, with one of the techniques used being multiple lawsuits filed against the same person on the same subject matter, meaning that all of them have to be defended and dealt with simultaneously and in parallel by the same person, which increases costs disproportionately.

Removed:Recital 33 b (new): (33b) This Directive establishes a special ground for the applicable law for publications as an act of public participation. In claims regarding a publication as an act of public participation, the applicable law should be considered to be the law of the place to which that publication is directed. Should that place not be possible to identify, the applicable law should be the law of the place of editorial control or relevant activity with regard to the act of public participation. In cases other than thoses covered by that exception, this Directive should not affect the application of Regulation (EC) No 864/2007 of the European Parliament and of the Council1a (‘Rome II Regulation’) . / 1a Regulation (EC) No 864/2007 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 July 2007 on the law applicable to non-contractual obligations (Rome II) (OJ L 199, 31.7.2007, p. 40).

Added:Recital 20 b (new): (20b) SLAPPs are consistently characterised by an imbalance of power between the claimant and the defendant in terms of financial and legal resources. This imbalance of power gives rise to particular concern if the abusive lawsuits are funded directly or indirectly from state budgets and are combined with other indirect and direct state measures against independent media organisations, independent journalism and civil society.

Added:Recital 20 c (new): (20c) Abusive court proceedings against public participation often infringe on defendants’ right to defence recognised by the Charter, and might also impact on their right to a fair trial and the presumption of innocence.

Added:Recital 22: (22) A matter should be considered to have cross-border implications unless both parties are domiciled in the same Member State as the court seised. Even where both parties are domiciled in the same Member State as the court seised, a matter should be considered to have cross-border implications in two other types of situations. The first situation is where the specific act of public participation is relevant to, more than one Member State due to the cross-border dimension of the act itself or due to a legitimate interest which the public may take in the matter concerned by the act, including if the act is accessible via electronic means. Such situations include for instance public participation acts, such as events organised by Union institutions, appearances in public hearings or widely disseminated publications. They could include as well statements or activities on matters, such as cross-border pollution, or allegations of money laundering with potential cross-border involvement. An act of public participation should be considered to be accessible in more than one Member State, in particular, if it is carried out on the internet, for example in the case of social media campaigns or online media coverage. The ubiquitous nature of the internet warrants considering acts of public participation that are accessible in more than one Member State to be matters with cross-border implications. The effect of digital means of communication on the notion of cross-border elements has …

Added:Recital 22 a (new): (22a) Support should be available to persons targeted by court proceedings against public participation from the moment competent authorities become aware of such persons and throughout the proceedings, in accordance with the rights set out in this Directive. Support should be made available by a variety of means, including by providing comprehensive and independent information and advice, in a manner that is easily accessible to the public and free of charge, on procedures and remedies available, on protection against intimidation, harassment or threats of legal action, and on the rights of the person concerned, and by providing legal aid in cross-border civil proceedings, legal aid in further proceedings and legal counselling or other legal assistance which is deemed appropriate. Member States should provide for financial assistance and support measures, including psychological support, for those targeted by court proceedings against public participation.

Added:Recital 22 b (new): (22b) Participation in proceedings against public participation exposes those targeted to particular psychological stress. The preparation for such proceedings and participation therein additionally ties up valuable resources of the defendants that they often do not have or that otherwise would have been invested in engaging in public participation. Associations, organisations and other collective bodies, such as trade unions, and any other legal entities which have, in accordance with the criteria laid down by their national law, a legitimate interest in safeguarding the rights of the defendant should therefore have the possibility of participating in the proceedings, either on behalf or in support of the defendant, with his or her approval, or of providing information in the judicial procedures provided for the enforcement of obligations under this Directive. Such possibility of legal representation should be without prejudice to the rights and competences of trade unions and worker’s representatives to engage on behalf of or in support of workers in judicial proceedings, in accordance with other Union and national rules.

Added:Recital 23: (23) Defendants should be able to apply for the following procedural safeguards: a request for a security to cover procedural costs, or procedural costs and damages, a request for an early dismissal of manifestly unfounded court proceedings, a request for remedies against abusive court proceedings (award of costs, compensation of damages and penalties), or all of them at the same time. Court proceedings brought against natural or legal persons on account of their engagement in public participation should be dealt with in a swift and effective manner, taking into account the circumstances of the case, the right to an effective remedy and the right to a fair trial.

Added:Recital 26: (26) To provide the defendant with an additional safeguard, there should be a possibility to grant him or her a security to cover procedural costs and/or damages, when the court considers that even if the claim is not manifestly unfounded, there are elements indicating an abuse of procedure and the prospects for success in the main proceedings are low. Where national law so provides, it should be possible to grant security to the defendant at any stage of the court proceedings and the judge should be able to order that a provision for court fees be allocated to the defendant and be borne by the claimant considering, where appropriate, the financial situation of the parties and the predictable costs of the proceedings. A security does not entail a judgement on the merits but serves as a precautionary measure ensuring the effects of a final decision finding an abuse of procedure and covering the costs and damage caused to the defendant. It should be for Member States to decide whether a security should be ordered by the court on its own motion or upon request by the defendant.

Added:Recital 29: (29) Courts or tribunals seised with an application for procedural safeguards, should act expeditiously in relation to that application, using the most efficient procedures available under national law. To ensure high expediency in the accelerated procedure on an application for early dismissal, Member States may set time limits for the holding of hearings or for the court to take a decision. They may as well adopt schemes akin to procedures in relation to provisional measures. Member States should make efforts to ensure that when the defendant has applied for other procedural safeguards, the decision is also taken in an expeditious manner. For expeditious treatment, Member States could take into account, amongst others, whether the claimant has initiated multiple or concerted proceedings in similar matters and the existence of attempts to intimidate, harass or threat the defendant.

Added:Recital 30: (30) If a defendant has applied for early dismissal, it should be for the claimant in the main proceedings to prove in the accelerated procedure that the claim is not manifestly unfounded This does not represent a limitation of access to justice, taking into account that the claimant carries the burden of proof in relation to that claim in the main proceedings and only needs to meet the much lower threshold of showing that the claim is not manifestly unfounded in order to avoid an early dismissal. In addition, decisions of early dismissal should always be made by a judge, on a case-by-case basis, and the claimants should always be entitled to lodge an appeal against the early decision to dismiss.

Added:Recital 31: (31) Costs should include all costs of the proceedings, including the full costs of legal representation, including pre-trial costs incurred by the defendant unless such costs are excessive. Costs of legal representation exceeding amounts laid down in statutory fee tables should not be considered as excessive per se, but allow costs to be awarded in full. Where national law does not provide for the full award of costs beyond statutory fees, the court should be able to award the full costs by whatever other means are available, in accordance with national law, including through the compensation of damages.

Added:Recital 31 a (new): (31a) Full compensation for damage should include both material and non-material damage, such as physical, reputational and psychological harm. In order for the defendant to be able to claim damages easily and in a timely manner, it should be possible to seek damages in the same proceedings as those brought against the defendant, where appropriate through a counterclaim. Material damage should include in particular lawyer fees, when they are not reimbursable as costs, travel expenses and medical costs, in particular for psychological care. Material damage should include pre-trial costs, if they are not included in costs under national law or this directive. Pre-trial costs should also include necessary expenses incurred in respect of defending the person's rights against abusive claims, including lawyer fees. Non-material damage should include in particular different forms of physical and/or psychological harm, pain and suffering or emotional distress related to the court proceedings, reputational damage and in general, any types of intangible damage.

Added:Recital 32: (32) The main objective of giving courts or tribunals the possibility to impose penalties is to deter potential claimants from initiating abusive court proceedings against public participation. Such penalties should be determined on a case by case basis and should be proportionate to the elements of abuse identified. When establishing amounts for penalties, courts should take into account the potential for a harmful or chilling effect of the proceedings on public participation, including as related to the nature of the claim, whether the claimant has initiated multiple or concerted proceedings in similar matters and the existence of attempts to intimidate, harass or threat the defendant.

Added:Recital 32 a (new): (32a) To ensure that the public can become aware of court decisions, Member States should establish a publicly accessible national register of relevant court decisions falling within the scope of this directive, in accordance with Union and national rules on the protection of personal data. The Commission should establish a publicly accessible Union register on the basis of the information from the registers of the Member States concerning relevant court decisions falling within the scope of this Directive, in accordance with Union rules on the protection of personal data.

Added:Recital 33: (33) In the cross-border context, it is also important to recognize the threat of SLAPPs from third countries targeting journalists, human rights defenders and other persons engaged in public participation who are domiciled in the European Union. They may involve excessive damages awarded against persons engaging in public participation. Court proceedings in third-countries are more complex and costly for the targets. To protect democracy and freedom of expression and information in the European Union and to avoid that the safeguards provided by this Directive are undermined by recourse to court proceedings in other jurisdictions, it is important to provide protection also against manifestly unfounded and abusive court proceedings in third countries.

Added:Recital 33 a (new): (33a) As regards jurisdiction for defamation claims or other claims based on civil or commercial law which could constitute abusive court proceedings against public participation, the Member State of domicile of the defendant should be considered as the sole forum, having due regard to cases where the defendants in cases of defamation are natural persons. With the exception of that rule concerning cases falling within the scope of this Directive, this Directive should not affect the application of the Brussels I Regulation.

Added:Recital 33 b (new): (33b) This Directive establishes a special ground for the applicable law for publications as an act of public participation. In claims regarding a publication as an act of public participation, the applicable law should be considered to be the law of the place to which that publication is directed. Should it not be possible to identify that place, the applicable law should be the law of the place of editorial control or of the relevant activity with regard to the act of public participation. In cases other than those covered by that exception, this Directive should not affect the application of Rome II Regulation.

Added:Recital 34: (34) This Directive creates a new special ground of jurisdiction in order to ensure that targets of SLAPPs domiciled in the European Union have an efficient remedy available in the Union against abusive court proceedings brought in a court or tribunal of a third country. This special ground of jurisdiction allows the targets domiciled in the European Union to seek, in the courts or tribunals of their domicile, for compensation of damages and costs incurred or reasonably expected to be incurred in connection with the proceedings before the court or tribunal of the third country. This right applies irrespective of the domicile of the claimant in the proceedings in the third country.

Removed:Recital 34 d (new): (34d) Member States should, on a regular basis, provide to the Commission available data showing how those targeted by court proceedings against public participation have accessed the safeguards set out in this Directive. Based on the data provided by the Member States, the Commission should submit a report every five years on the evaluation and review of this Directive to the European Parliament and to the Council. Those reports should be made public.

Added:Recital 34 d (new): (34d) With due respect for the independence of the legal profession, Member States should encourage the adoption by professional associations of deontological rules that guide the conduct of legal professionals to discourage the taking of abusive lawsuits against public participation, including, where appropriate, disciplinary sanctions for the violation of those rules. Such measures should be developed in close cooperation with relevant stakeholders including professional associations, social partners and civil society organisations.

Removed:Article 1 – paragraph 1: This Directive provides safeguards against manifestly unfounded and abusive court proceedings in civil matters, as well as the threats thereof, having cross-border implications brought against natural and legal persons engaging in public participation.

Added:Recital 34 e (new): (34e) The collection of data is paramount to document cases of abusive court proceedings and to provide solutions in order to prevent them. This Directive should establish common criteria to standardise the data collection procedures in Member States and ensure that comparable data is collected. Member States should, on a regular basis, provide to the Commission available data showing how those targeted by court proceedings against public participation have accessed the safeguards set out in this Directive. Based on the data provided by the Member States, the Commission should submit a report every five years on the evaluation and review of this Directive to the European Parliament and to the Council. Those reports should be made public.

Removed:Article 2 – paragraph 1: This Directive shall apply to matters of a civil or commercial nature having cross-border implications, including interim precautionary measures and counter claims, whatever the nature of the court or tribunal. It shall not extend, in particular, to revenue, customs or administrative matters or the liability of the State for acts and omissions in the exercise of State authority (acta iure imperii).

Added:Recital 36: (36) This Directive is complementary to the Commission recommendation on protecting journalists and human rights defenders who engage in public participation from manifestly unfounded or abusive court proceedings (“Strategic lawsuits against public participation”). This recommendation is addressed to Member States and it provides a comprehensive toolbox of measures including training, awareness-raising, support to targets of abusive court proceedings and data collection, reporting and monitoring of court proceedings against public participation. When transposing this Directive, Member States should pay particular attention to the implementation of the Commission’s Recommendation as regards, in particular, the inclusion of safeguards, similar to those provided for by this Directive, in relation to domestic cases not covered by this Directive’s scope, and the provision of legal assistance to defendants in an affordable and easily accessible manner, and consider the inclusion in their national transposition laws of targeted provisions to that effect. Member States should also be encouraged to consider establishing a fund to support victims of SLAPPs, which should be directly used for legal fees or the provision of legal aid and psychological support.

Added:Recital 36 a (new): (36a) This Directive lays down rules on comprehensive support and preventive measures, non-financial support mechanisms such as the provision of legal aid and psychological support, as well as training, awareness-raising and data collection measures. It also seeks to ensure that data are collected by establishing common criteria at Union level. A national focal point should be established to gather and share information on all organisations that provide guidance and support for targets of abusive court proceedings against public participation. Such organisations could include associations of legal professionals, media and press councils, umbrella associations for human rights defenders, associations at Union and national level, law firms defending targets of manifestly unfounded or abusive court proceedings against public participation pro bono, legal clinics of universities and other non-governmental organisations.

Added:Recital 36 b (new): (36b) To foster prevention of the initiation of SLAPPs and protection of targeted natural or legal persons, it is crucial to promote relevant information, awareness-raising, campaigns, education and training, including on their rights and protection mechanisms.

Added:Recital 36 c (new): (36c) Training for journalists, other media professionals and human rights defenders should strengthen their capacity to deal with abusive court proceedings against public participation. It should focus on recognising such court proceedings, how to manage being targeted by them and inform them of their rights and obligations in order for them to be able to take the necessary steps to protect themselves against such proceedings. Training should also be provided to legal professionals in order to increase awareness of abusive court proceedings and be able to detect them at a very early stage.

Added:Article 1 – paragraph 1: This Directive provides a set of minimum standards of protection and safeguards against manifestly unfounded or abusive court proceedings in civil matters, as well as the threats thereof, with cross-border implications brought against natural and legal persons engaging in public participation.

Added:Article 2 – paragraph 1: This Directive shall apply to matters of a civil or commercial nature having cross-border implications, including interim and precautionary measures, counteractions or other particular types of remedies available under other instruments, whatever the nature of the court or tribunal. It shall not extend, in particular, to revenue, customs or administrative matters or the liability of the State for acts and omissions in the exercise of State authority (acta iure imperii).