30 May 2025 | Africa, Americas, Asia and Pacific, Egypt, Europe and Central Asia, Middle East and North Africa, News and features, Russia, Samoa, Uganda, United Kingdom, Venezuela
In the age of online information, it can feel harder than ever to stay informed. As we get bombarded with news from all angles, important stories can easily pass us by. To help you cut through the noise, every Friday Index publishes a weekly news roundup of some of the key stories covering censorship and free expression. This week, we look at a controversial new monument to an infamous dictator, and Uganda’s “state-sanctioned bigotry”.
A tribute to repression?: Moscow unveils new Stalin statue in subway station
At the Taganskaya metro station in central Moscow, a controversial new monument has been revealed: a life-sized figure of Joseph Stalin, perhaps the most infamous and brutal of Soviet Russia’s dictators, amongst a crowd of adoring citizens. He stands before St Basil’s Cathedral and the Kremlin’s Spasskaya Tower, with a banner to his predecessor Vladimir Lenin unfurled above his head.
A monument to a leader who executed nearly 800,000 people, whilst millions more died in prison work camps known as Gulags and from famine under his reign, is of course highly controversial. The display has been dubbed a “gift” to the people who travel Moscow’s metro, and opinions have been firmly split amongst citizens – bouquets of red carnations adorn the feet of Stalin, left by those who look back fondly on the man who industrialised the Soviet Union, while others, such as members of Russia’s liberal Yabloko party, have protested the installation of a homage to “a tyrant and a dictator”, describing the statue as “an act of mockery against the descendants of the repressed”.
Should such a monument be permitted? To many, Stalin symbolises decades of brutality, repression, fear and censorship, and many have raised concerns that honouring him in this way embraces a history of violence at a time when Russia is waging an aggressive war in Ukraine. But some Russians see the monument as a memorial to a man who shaped much of their nation’s history. Artistic expression must be protected and history, including its horrors, must not be forgotten. However, ironically, when protesters left a poster on the monument displaying quotes from Vladimir Putin previously condemning Stalin, it was quickly removed, and one of the activists was detained, somewhat undermining the notion of artistic agency.
State-sanctioned bigotry: Human Rights Watch report condemns Uganda’s anti-LGBTQ+ laws
International NGO Human Rights Watch (HRW) has issued a damning report detailing how the Ugandan government has consistently repressed and restricted LGBTQ+ people throughout the reign of president Yoweri Museveni, particularly since the introduction of the Anti-Homosexuality Act in May 2023.
Uganda has been described as having the world’s harshest anti-gay laws, and the report reinforces this notion. The report details the 2023 act’s egregious punishments, which include the death penalty for “serial offenders” of “aggravated homosexuality”, and life imprisonment for same-sex conduct. It also enforced censorship, making any advocacy or discussion of LGBTQ+ rights punishable by up to 20 years in prison.
HRW reported a surge in threats towards LGBTQ+ Ugandans over the past two years, due to a targeted effort by Ugandan politicians to spread misinformation and shape public discourse against the LGBTQ+ community. Oryem Nyeko, senior Africa researcher at HRW, stated that Uganda must “end its assault on LGBT people and choose a future of dignity, equality, and freedom for all those who live there.”
The dangers of defamation: Samoa urged to repeal defamation law that silences journalists
On 1 May 2025, Samoan journalist Lagi Keresoma published an article alleging that a former police officer had appealed to the Head of State to have charges against him removed, reported to be forgery charges regarding a loan application. Just over two weeks later, Keresoma, head of the Journalists Association of (Western) Samoa (JAWS), was arrested and charged with defamation under a law which has long drawn international scrutiny.
Samoa’s harsh criminal libel law was previously repealed, but was reintroduced in 2017 with harsher penalties, and has since been weaponised against critical and investigative reporting. JAWS has stated that the case represents “a troubling development for press freedom in Samoa”, and that the defamation charges could be perceived as “an abuse of power to suppress public scrutiny and dissent.”
The country treats defamation as a criminal rather than a civil matter, something which the UN Human Rights Committee has warned against. Samoa has fallen significantly in Reporters Without Borders’ Press Freedom Index, from 22 in 2024 to 44 in 2025.
Arbitrary detention: UN rules that Alaa Abd el-Fattah is being held illegally in Egypt
Following an 18-month investigation, an independent UN panel has found that the British-Egyptian writer and activist Alaa Abd el-Fattah is illegally detained in Cairo, and has called on the Egyptian government to release him immediately.
Detained since 2019, el-Fattah was sentenced to five years in prison in 2021, convicted of spreading false news and harming Egypt’s national interests. Amnesty International described the verdict as a “travesty of justice”. Since September 2024, his mother Laila Souief, who is based in London, has been on hunger strike to protest his detention. She was admitted to hospital this week, marking the second time she has been hospitalised since February.
Many leading figures have called on the UK Foreign and Commonwealth Development Office (FCDO) to issue warnings against travelling to the north African country, with former British ambassador to Egypt John Casson describing the country as a “police state” in a letter to The Times. He said that British citizens in the country “cannot expect fair process, nor normal support from the British government”, and that “Alaa Abd El-Fattah’s case is not isolated.” UK prime minister Keir Starmer has called Egyptian president Abdel Fattah el-Sissi twice, urging for el-Fattah’s release, but no movement has yet been seen regarding the fate of one of Egypt’s most prominent writers.
An uncontested victory: Maduro make big gains in elections as opposition parties boycott
On 25 May, Venezuela’s regional and parliamentary elections took place, but the ballot papers were notably barren. Nicolás Maduro’s United Socialist Party of Venezuela’s (PSUV) stormed to victory in 23 out of 24 states. However, it was largely uncontested, due to a decision by the majority of opposition parties to boycott the vote in protest at last year’s presidential election, the results of which were proven to have been falsified.
Opposition leader María Corina Machado was a leading voice in the boycott campaign, stating that the true results of the 2024 presidential election must be adhered to before any other vote. In a video posted earlier this month, she announced that “We voted on 28 July. On 25 May, we won’t vote.” Venezuela’s electoral council claimed that the turnout was above 40%, but have neglected to post the election results online as was standard practice before 2024, with the pollster Meganálisis claiming turnout was actually around 14%.
Not all opposition members agreed with the boycott; former presidential candidate Henrique Capriles continued to campaign and urged Venezuelans to vote, arguing that by not voting, “all you’re doing is making things easier for the government.” But it seems that regardless of the outcome, Maduro would have clung on to power – and now, with an overwhelming majority in government and an ever-increasing crackdown on political dissidents, the future of both free speech and fair elections in Venezuela looks bleak.
17 Apr 2025 | Campaigns, Europe and Central Asia, European Union, Media Freedom, News and features, Slapps, SLAPPs
The 2025 edition of the annual European SLAPP Contest put on by the Coalition Against SLAPPs in Europe (CASE) took place in Brussels last week in front of an enthusiastic crowd, brought together by a shared determination to celebrate those who use the legal system to harass and intimidate people across Europe so impressively.
Though these corporations and individuals may be too humble to seek the spotlight themselves, we are determined to shine a light on their efforts. After all, such hard work should not go unnoticed!
So, in no particular order, the winners of the European SLAPP Contest 2025 are…
Clean Tech International (Romania)
Clean Tech International was the deserving winner of the Corporate Bully of the Year award due to its tireless efforts intimidating environmental activists who insist upon making themselves a nuisance by protesting against pollution in the local area.
AER Muntenia, an environmental conservation organisation based in Slobozia – a Romanian city with a population of around 50,000 people – had the audacity to challenge Clean Tech’s environmental permit due to the activists’ claim that the city is being polluted with unbearable smells and loud noise. The multi-million-pound corporation responded in a logical manner, suing the concerned citizens involved for €20 million ($22.7 million) in damages should the permit be suspended, and causing the citizens’ land assets to be frozen.
Clean Tech has shown that nobody is too small or well-meaning to avoid punishment for their activism. Although it sadly could not be in attendance for the award ceremony, its certificate was graciously accepted on its behalf by the president of AER Muntenia, Dorina Milea, her son Eduard and the group’s representative Ciprian Bocioaga. Their passionate speeches about their desire for clean air and wish to protect their home city laid bare their villainous intentions.
Rachida Dati, Minister of Culture (France)
Another worthy winner, current French Minister of Culture Rachida Dati is now the proud owner of the 2025 SLAPP Politician of the Year award thanks to her dogged consistency and determination when it comes to silencing unfavourable media coverage.
Dati has filed multiple defamation lawsuits against media outlets Le Canard enchaîné, Le Nouvel Observateur and Libération over reports on her political and financial dealings, including ties to Azerbaijan, Qatar and former corporate executives. We applaud her dedication to obstructing such menacing practices as investigative journalism.
Although Dati has lost several of her cases, she is undeterred; for her, it’s the taking part that counts (particularly as the burden of spiralling legal costs faced by media outlets creates an environment of fear, encouraging self-censorship). Our congratulations to her.
Signature Clinic (UK)
It takes quite some doing to emerge victorious in the competitive category that is Farcical Threat of the Year, but the UK-based cosmetic surgery firm Signature Clinic managed it.
The problem began when several clients decided to brazenly exercise their right to free speech by writing of the disappointing experiences they had had at the clinic on social media. However, the pain described by those former clients pales in comparison to the suffering of Signature Clinic, which recognised that such comments could in fact be bad for business. It took the logical next step and politely asked those involved to remove their negative reviews by threatening them with imprisonment and filing police reports over their posts.
Although a harassment injunction case was dismissed as “totally without merit” in 2024 and most cases have been lost or settled, Signature Clinic has ploughed on with its attempts to silence criticism, with one case still ongoing. Its commitment to improving its reputation by responding aggressively to those who publicise its faults is certainly an interesting tactic, and is well worthy of this prestigious award.
Energy Transfer (Netherlands / US)
From the company who brought you Dakota Access Pipeline, get ready for the International Bully of the Year award! US-based Energy company Energy Transfer (ET) states on its website that it is “committed to protecting the environment” as well as “respecting all others and taking care of the land through which we cross”. What better way to show this than to sue activists from the environmental non-profit organisation Greenpeace International for hundreds of millions of pounds?
ET accused Greenpeace International (and other wings of Greenpeace) of defamation, of orchestrating criminal behaviour during protests at the Dakota Access Pipeline, and of inciting, funding and facilitating acts of terrorism. So, what did Greenpeace do to evoke such ire? Did it blow up some of ET’s pipelines with sticks of dynamite? Nope – it supported the Standing Rock tribe as they stood against the pipeline, signing an open letter alongside 500 other organisations calling on lenders to halt their loans to the Dakota Access Pipeline.
ET was understandably worried that the protests against its actions were harming the company’s reputation. We hope that winning an award as prestigious as the 2025 International Bully of the Year will help to ease such fears.
Eni (Italy)
No case is too small for our next winner, who picked up the gong for 2025 SLAPP Addict of the Year – it’s Eni!
Despite being one of the world’s largest oil companies, it still finds the time to ensure no stone goes unturned when it comes to protecting its good name. It doesn’t discriminate when it comes to SLAPPs, having filed defamation lawsuits against journalists, activists and environmental groups. Now that’s a strong work ethic.
It’s naturally tough to narrow down the highlights from the SLAPP Addict of the Year, but one particularly notable case targeted Greenpeace and ReCommon, two entities that a few months earlier had filed a legal action seeking to hold Eni accountable for past and potential future damages for its contribution to the climate crisis.
Eni’s determination to silence criticism comes despite suffering major losses in lawsuits against the Italian newspaper Il Fatto Quotidiano and journalist Claudio Gatti over coverage of the Opl 245 corruption scandal in Nigeria. The resolve to continue on its litigious path is an inspiration to bullies everywhere.
Aleksandar Šapić, Mayor of Belgrade (Serbia)
Being recognised by Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) in the SLAPP contest jury is one thing, but it’s an added privilege to pick up the 2025 People’s Choice award. This year, that honour belongs to the Mayor of Belgrade, Aleksandar Šapić.
Šapić filed a lawsuit in 2023 against the Balkan Investigative Reporting Network (BIRN Serbia) and several members of its staff over an article exposing his undeclared €820,000 ($929,700) villa in Trieste, seeking €51,200 ($58,000) in damages for emotional distress.
BIRN maintains that its reporting was accurate and verified, but its staff will be sure to think twice about conducting investigative journalism thanks to the tireless efforts of the Belgrade mayor.
All in all, the event was a highly successful evening celebrating the impressive work of Europe’s biggest bullies. Thanks to the five MEPs who made up our jury panel, Veronika Cifrová Ostrihoňová (Renew), Daniel Freund (The Greens / European Free Alliance), David Casa (European People’s Party), Sandro Ruotolo (Group of the Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats) and Manon Aubry (The Left). Thanks also to those who stepped up during the ceremony to receive the awards on behalf of the winners, who were mysteriously absent. Let’s do it again next year!
Read more about the work CASE do to fight SLAPPs here.
Watch the full livestream of the 2025 European SLAPP Contest here.
27 Nov 2023 | Ireland, News and features
The removal of juries in High Court defamation actions is one of many proposed reforms put forward by the Irish government in the draft scheme of the Defamation (Amendment) Bill earlier this year, but it has quickly emerged as one of the most divisive. Many experts contest the benefits of removing juries from defamation proceedings, arguing that they are too important a democratic institution to do away with.
While most civil actions have been determined by judges since 1988, defamation cases citing damages above €75,000 still come before a jury in Dublin’s High Court. The current defamation reform aims to improve the efficiency of defamation cases, which are extraordinarily time-consuming and expensive, while also addressing the outsized damages that juries award and the difficulty they have ruling on an increasingly complex area of law.
The proposed changes to the legislation would remove juries from defamation cases, allowing them to be decided by judges alone. The Department of Justice has argued that juries are unsuitable on grounds that they: (a) are unreliable in their evaluation of complex arguments, (b) award unreasonably large amounts in damages, (c) create delays in trials, and (d) increase legal costs for all parties. These arguments were heavily disputed during the oral hearings that were held by the Joint Committee on Justice in summer 2023. Some witnesses suggested that judges could equally cause delays, award high damages, and produce inconsistent decisions.
Through a legal review, statistical analysis of the High Court’s Jury List, and interviews with experienced practitioners and academics, this report examines empirical evidence on both sides of the debate in order to determine the extent to which juries should have a role in defamation cases. Dozens of judicial decisions and over 400 case records from the Jury List were analysed in preparation for this report, although the lack of information in the public records limited the scope of the research.
Those who support the removal of jury trials from defamation proceedings give three main reasons: outsized legal costs, extended delays, and excessive damages. This report, which you can view below or download here, assesses each of these arguments in turn.
16 Nov 2022 | Italy, News and features, Statements
Members of the Coalition Against SLAPPs in Europe (CASE), with the support of the coalition’s Italian group and Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR), express solidarity with Roberto Saviano who attended the first hearing in the proceedings for aggravated defamation initiated against him by current Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni. We are seriously concerned about the criminal proceedings initiated in 2021 by the current Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni, the leader of Fratelli d’Italia. Under the current provisions on defamation, Roberto Saviano risks imprisonment for his criticism of Meloni during a TV programme.
Such accusations act as a gag on freedom of expression, a fundamental right enshrined in the Italian Constitution and international law. No journalist or writer should be prosecuted for expressing their honest opinion on issues of public interest. A criminal defamation suit is not an acceptable response in a democracy, all the more so when it comes from a high ranking representative of the institution. This threat to Saviano reveals, once again, the degree of the abuse of defamation suits or SLAPPs (Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation) in Italy.
The lawsuit for aggravated defamation was initiated by current Prime Minister Meloni in November 2021, in response to comments made by Roberto Saviano during the episode of the TV programme Piazza Pulita which aired on 3rd December 2020. Saviano’s comment was formulated in response to the controversial rhetoric employed in recent years by the two political leaders to describe the migration emergency in the Mediterranean.
In November 2020, the NGO ship Open Arms rescued a number of displaced individuals from a shipwreck, caused by a collapsing dinghy in the Mediterranean Sea. The delayed rescue by the Italian authorities had prevented timely assistance to the survivors who were in dire need of specialist medical care, including a six-month-old infant who later died on the Open Arms. Following Piazza Pulita’s coverage of the investigation on the authorities’ delayed response, Roberto Saviano had referred to both Meloni, the then leader of Fratelli d’Italia and the Lega secretary, Matteo Salvini as ‘bastards’.
The possibility that Roberto Saviano, in his role as a writer and journalist, could incur a prison sentence for expressing his opinion on a politically sensitive issue, such as the treatment of migrants in Italy, once again draws attention to the serious inadequacies of Italian libel laws. The right to freedom of expression is enshrined in Article 21 of the Italian Constitution. Furthermore, international law and jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) guarantees that the right to freedom of expression extends to statements and ideas that may ‘offend, shock or disturb‘ and that opinions are entitled to enhanced protection under the guarantee of the right to freedom of expression. Further, the ECtHR has clarified that public figures and, in particular, political actors must tolerate higher levels of criticism and scrutiny given their public position within society, and that in such cases criminal prosecution has a chilling effect and is violating the right to freedom of expression as guaranteed by Article 10 ECHR.
Those who express their opinion on matters of public interest should not fear nor be exposed to intimidation, conviction, or imprisonment. On this last point, the Italian Constitutional Court has made its position clear, urging lawmakers to initiate a general reform of the legislation on defamation that would bring Italian legislation in line with the standards of European and international law. With the ruling of 9 June 2020 and the decision of 22 June 2021, the Court, in line with previous judgments of the ECtHR, declared prison sentences in cases of defamation in the press unconstitutional. However, the provision of prison sentences remains in place for cases of ‘exceptional gravity’. In accordance with such provisions, Saviano still faces a custodial sentence because the formal charge is aggravated defamation.
At the conclusion of the first hearing at the Criminal Court of Rome on 15 November 2022, it was decided that the trial will be re-assigned to a new judge and adjourned to 12 December. The current Minister of Infrastructure, Matteo Salvini, has filed a petition to become a civil plaintiff. The Lega leader has also a pending defamation lawsuit initiated against Roberto Saviano in 2018: its first hearing is scheduled for 1 February 2023. Further, on 28 January 2023 another defamation trial instigated by Gennaro Sangiuliano, current Minister of Culture, awaits Roberto Saviano.
At the end of the first hearing in the Meloni case on 15th November, Saviano reiterated the central role that writers play in a democratic society: “My tools are words. I try, with the word, to persuade, to convince, to activate”. Exiting the courtroom, he argued that: “Democracy is based not only on a consensus that can lead to winning the electoral lottery, but exists if dissent and criticism are allowed. Without such premises there is no democratic oxygen”.
The perilous situation in which Roberto Saviano finds himself must also be taken into account. Life under escort, already a cause of marginalisation for journalists, was only necessary due to threats made against Saviano by organised crime and these threats should not be amplified through further threats made by high ranking politicians.
Joining the dissent expressed by Italian and European journalists’ associations, the undersigned organisations call on Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni to immediately withdraw the charges against Roberto Saviano. We support the recommendation formulated by Italian and European civil society and international organisations to the new parliament to act against vexatious complaints and to quickly adopt a comprehensive reform of both civil and criminal defamation laws in Italy. Finally, we urge Italy to bring forward legislation to tackle the use of SLAPPs in line with the EU Anti-SLAPP Recommendation of 27 April 2022. The Italian Government is also urged to give its full support to the Anti-SLAPP Directive as proposed by the European Commission.
Signed
OBC Transeuropa (OBCT)
aditus foundation
Access Info Europe
ARTICLE 19
Blueprint for Free Speech
Civic Initiatives
Civil Liberties Union For Europe
Ecojustice Ireland
European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF)
European Federation of Journalists (EFJ)
Global Witness
Helsinki Foundation for Human Rights
Index on Censorship
International Press Institute
Irish PEN/ PEN na hÉireann
Justice & Environment
Legal Human Academy
Libera Informazione
PEN International
Presseclub Concordia
Solomon
The Daphne Caruana Galizia Foundation
Whistleblowing International Network
