Threat of libel ‘chilling academic freedom’, say UK researchers

Scholars threatened with libel action over their research into the UK’s links with Russian oligarchs are calling for new “anti-SLAPP” laws to help uphold academic freedom.

In an open letter to the UK prime minister Keir Starmer, academics have called for legislation to stop the use of so-called Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation (SLAPPs), often seen as a way of blocking research findings from being published. 

Among the signatories are University of Exeter scholars John Heathershaw and Tena Prelec, along with the University of Oxford’s Tom Mayne, who have previously faced libel threats over their work looking into London’s links to wealthy individuals from post-Soviet states.

The letter published on 4 March describes how “academics have found themselves at the receiving end of legal threats by companies and wealthy individuals in response to critical research”.

“As such, SLAPPs pose a threat to academic freedom alongside direct state censorship, physical attacks, imprisonment and (online) harassment,” it continues.

The actions “increase the risk of academic self-censorship; the likelihood that academics will avoid researching those in power; the cost of undertaking such research due to the required legal support; and limit academics’ ability to disseminate research findings and effectively reach public and policymaking audiences”, it adds.

While SLAPPs are a “global problem”, the letter explains, “England in particular has been identified as a premier location for ‘libel tourism’ due to its permissive legal provisions on defamation”.

While recent legislation, including the UK Economic Crime and Corporate Transparency Act (ECCTA, 2023), “acknowledged SLAPPs as an issue in law”, there is “no constitutional protection for either freedom of speech or academic freedom”, continues the letter which was organised by the charity Sense about Science.

Heathershaw, Prelec and Mayne were forced to make changes to their Chatham House report after facing libel threats in 2021. Other incidents highlighted in the letter include former academic and then Green Party MSP Andy Wightman successfully defending himself against defamation action brought over his conservation work and Karen Dawisha, a Russia scholar, being dropped by her publisher Cambridge University Press over concerns that her book would attract libel cases.

“Existing legal protections are insufficient to fully protect academic freedom,” the letter says, stating that while peer-reviewed papers have a modicum of protection, “academic monographs and other outputs in non-peer-reviewed journals remain unprotected”.

“Given that many SLAPPs are not meant to make it to court but to wear down the targeted critic, pre-court protective measures are especially needed,” explains the letter which highlights how “academics seeking to defend themselves [may] still need significant funds” to see their work published.

“Without an effective early dismissal mechanism, an objective test for filtering SLAPPs out of court, and the ability to minimise costs and penalise bad conduct, courts and judges do not have the tools or guidance they need,” the letter concludes.

Clearly the problem is not new and effective solutions are still needed,” it adds, stating legislative action on SLAPPs “already had cross-party support”.

“By bringing forward universal anti-SLAPP measures in the next King’s Speech, parliament will finally be given the opportunity to establish robust and accessible protections against abusive legal threats and actions,” it adds.

jack.grove@timeshighereducation.com