On 16 October 2025, Generations for Rights Over the World (GROW) hosted a webinar entitled “France and SLAPPs: Debate on the Decriminalisation of Defamation in Light of Comparative Practices” (La France face aux SLAPPs : débat sur la dépénalisation de la diffamation à la lumière des pratiques comparées). Bringing together journalists, lawyers, and international experts, the event explored the challenges posed by criminal defamation in France and the growing use of Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation (SLAPPs), situating French debates within a global context.
A complex political challenge
France’s 1881 Press Freedom Act originally sought to strike a balance between protecting individuals’ reputations and safeguarding press freedom. Over time, however, criminal defamation provisions have increasingly been used as tools to intimidate journalists, activists, and civil society actors. SLAPPs exploit these provisions to impose financial and psychological pressure, often chilling public participation. The webinar therefore asked a crucial question: can France preserve the spirit of the 1881 compromise while protecting public debate from judicial harassment?
In advance of the event, GROW’s research suggested that decriminalising defamation could bring France into line with global trends and international human rights standards. Many democracies, including the United Kingdom, Ireland, Argentina, Sri Lanka, Ghana, etc, have already abolished criminal defamation in an effort to protect freedom of expression. However, as highlighted in earlier discussions, including GROW’s September 2025 roundtable, questions remained. If not carefully designed, civil defamation proceedings may lead to similar abuses, particularly through costly legal action.
Multiregional perspectives shaping the debate
The webinar was conceived to bring in multiregional perspectives, enabling comparisons between France and countries that have already decriminalised defamation, and drawing lessons from other contexts. Speakers included Alexandre Buysine (journalist and Secretary General of the SNJ), Clémence Witt (Paris and Barcelona Bars, media law specialist), Marie Cornanguer (Paris Bar, media law specialist), and Maksym Popovych (Senior Legal Officer for Europe, ARTICLE 19). The discussion was chaired by Marta Cabrera (Media Defence).
Contributions went beyond a simple pro-and-con analysis. Alexandre Buysine and Marie Cornanguer emphasised the historical safeguards of the 1881 Press Act – including short limitation periods and capped fines – which provide predictability in criminal proceedings. By contrast, Clémence Witt and Maksym Popovych highlighted that these safeguards often fail in practice when confronted with SLAPPs, and that international experience points to a clear global shift towards decriminalisation.
International examples, including Argentina, Sri Lanka, Ghana, and Lesotho, provided valuable context, illustrating approaches to balancing reputation and freedom of expression. These insights encouraged participants to look beyond simplistic proposals and instead consider comprehensive reforms, such as mechanisms for early dismissal of abusive lawsuits, procedural guarantees, and institutional support for defendants.
Rethinking policy through dialogue
The webinar demonstrated how multiregional perspectives can reshape domestic policy discussions. Rather than calling for immediate decriminalisation, the emerging recommendation is that France should use the transposition period of the EU anti-SLAPP Directive to launch a structured and inclusive debate on the future of defamation laws. This approach preserves the long-term objective of decriminalisation while ensuring that reforms are carefully designed and aligned with France’s unique legal and historical context.
Audience engagement played a key role, providing practical insights and highlighting real-world concerns – from procedural barriers to reputational harm. The discussion underscored that freedom of expression and the protection of reputation are not competing goals, but values which must be carefully balanced in a modern democracy.
Looking ahead
This debate underscores the value of multiregional dialogue in shaping public policy. Comparative perspectives challenge assumptions, highlight nuanced risks, and reveal innovative solutions. GROW expects that integrating these insights will strengthen both the quality and impact of its future recommendations.
By fostering an international debate on defamation, SLAPPs, and freedom of expression, GROW continues to promote informed, inclusive, and forward-looking policy discussions across Europe.
This event was the third organised by GROW as part of a multiregional series under the Building for the Future Initiative, led by On Think Tanks, with support from the Open Society Foundation, focusing on safeguarding freedom of expression.
