Slapp cases: David Davis lambasts law firm for trying to ‘repress free speech’ – The Bureau of Investigative Journalism

During the debate, Labour MP and former shadow media minister Chris Matheson revealed he had learned of the case and had filed a parliamentary question about it only to hear from Boies Schiller Flexner, the law firm handling the case, which has represented various controversial clients including Harvey Weinstein.

Matheson said to Davis: I tabled a written question in this place about their effects on media freedom. I have to tell the House and the Rt Hon Gentleman that I was then contacted by lawyers for the company asking me to withdraw that question. What is his response to their asking me to withdraw a perfectly innocent parliamentary question?

Davis response was stark. First, the lawyers clearly do not understand parliamentary privilege, he told assembled MPs. Secondly, what they are doing will come back to this in a second is trying to repress free speech and transparency in this country.

Gareth Johnson, a junior minister in the justice department, responded on behalf of the government, reaffirming its commitment to bring forward measures to restrict Slapp actions and protect media freedom.

Slapps are wrong. They are a form of bullying. They need to be stopped, and stopped through legislation, he said. First, let me emphasise that investigative journalism is of central importance to a functioning democracy.

We rely on journalists to hold powerful people and organisations to account for our collective good. Lawfare that targets our public watchdogs through aggressive, intimidatory tactics must be stamped out.

Johnson was warned by MPs that such reforms are required as a matter of urgency.

More:
Slapp cases: David Davis lambasts law firm for trying to 'repress free speech' - The Bureau of Investigative Journalism