• Defamation is frequently used to unjustly stifle dissent. However, it can provide a genuine remedy for those whose reputations are harmed by the statements or actions of others.
• Criminal defamation is generally considered to be disproportionate under international law. Even civil defamation is often punished too harshly, going beyond just righting the wrong that was committed.
• Truth is a core defence against defamation claims.
• Some types of speech should not be subject to defamation actions, such as opinions and satire.
• The growth of SLAPP suits by corporate actors using defamation laws to silence or intimidate those who criticise them is a concerning contemporary development that needs to be addressed.
Introduction
The use of meritless defamation proceedings is a notorious method of stifling freedom of expression and dissent, particularly of journalists. While defamation laws aim to provide individuals with a remedy for public statements that harm their reputation, they inevitably come into conflict with the right to freedom of expression. Correctly balancing the protection of freedom of expression and the public’s right to information with protecting individuals’ reputations is central to the appropriateness or otherwise of defamation laws and claims.
The impact of the internet, and particularly social media networks, has meant that it is easier than ever to publish content to a wide audience. As a result, defamation proceedings have become a commonly used instrument wielded against the authors of statements published online, whether justifiably so or not, while also contributing to a significant increase in defamatory statements.
The ability to freely post information on social media and the internet without the same degree of thought and review as traditional media, combined with a lack of awareness about defamation laws and the fact that many countries have adopted vague legal rules governing online defamation has led to an increase in online defamation cases and some ambiguity in how defamation applies online.
Dealing with online defamation cases is particularly challenging for many reasons. The online environment can make it more difficult to identify or trace authors, and victims may want to consider whether to pursue the author or the system operator, since some legal systems consider anyone who participates in distributing defamatory statements to be equally liable. In addition, deciding the jurisdiction of the court to hear the matter can be difficult as messages posted online are available all over the world, and the parties to a dispute may come from and be located in different jurisdictions.
This module provides an overview of defamation laws in the MENA region and how courts have attempted to strike a balance between various rights in recent jurisprudence, with a particular focus on online defamation cases.
In this module
- Introduction
- What is Defamation?
- Criminal Defamation
- Civil Defamation
- Can a True Statement be Defamatory?
- The Right to Protection Against Attacks on Reputation
- What is the Right Way to Deal with Online Defamation?
- Types of Potentially Defamatory Statements
- Types of Claims
- Conclusion
Access full module
Disclaimer: This publication is provided for information and research purposes only. It does not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon as such. While every effort has been made to ensure the accuracy of the information contained herein, Media Defence accepts no responsibility for any loss or damage arising from reliance on this material. Readers are encouraged to seek independent legal advice before acting on any of the information contained in this publication.