The European Commission has launched infringement proceedings against Italy and 13 other member states for failing to fully transpose EU Directive 2024/1069, the so-called anti-SLAPP law designed to shield journalists, activists, and civil society organizations from abusive lawsuits aimed at silencing public interest reporting. The move places Italy—which recorded more SLAPP cases than any other European nation in 2024—in the crosshairs of Brussels, with a two-month deadline to demonstrate full compliance or face escalating legal and financial consequences.
Why This Matters
• Legal deadline missed: The directive's transposition deadline of 7 May 2026 has passed, triggering formal proceedings against 14 countries including Italy, Germany, Spain, and Austria.
• Limited protection: Italy's current implementation covers only cross-border civil cases, leaving over 90% of domestic SLAPP victims without safeguards.
• Financial risk: Failure to comply could result in daily penalties imposed by the EU Court of Justice, plus potential liability for damages to individuals harmed by the legislative gap.
• Press freedom at stake: With 21 SLAPP cases registered in Italy in 2024 alone—the highest in Europe for the second consecutive year—the incomplete law leaves journalists and watchdogs exposed.
At a Glance
| Key Fact | Detail ||---|---|| Deadline for Response | Mid-September 2026 || Countries Under Infringement | 14 EU member states || Potential Penalties | Daily fines from EU Court of Justice || SLAPP Cases in Italy (2024) | 21 cases (highest in Europe) || Current Protection Gap | Domestic cases not covered |
What Are SLAPPs?
Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation—SLAPPs—are legal actions filed not to win in court, but to drain the target's resources, time, and morale. They exploit civil defamation statutes and disproportionate damage claims to intimidate reporters, environmental activists, and corruption investigators into silence. The European Commission estimates that between 2010 and 2024, 1,303 SLAPP cases were documented across the continent, with Italy accounting for roughly a quarter of the total.
Italy's Partial Compliance and the Criticism
Italy's Parliament passed Law 36/2026 (European Delegation Act 2025) in March 2026, delegating the government to adopt implementing decrees. On 2 July 2026, the Italian Cabinet approved a preliminary draft of the transposition decree. However, the legislation as written applies only to civil cases with cross-border implications, mirroring the directive's minimum scope without extending protections to purely domestic disputes—the vast majority of SLAPP litigation in Italy.
CASE Italia (Coalition Against SLAPPs in Europe) and the Osservatorio Ossigeno per l'Informazione, which tracks threats to press freedom, have publicly criticized this narrow approach. Between 2022 and 2024, Ossigeno documented 132 SLAPP actions targeting 290 journalists, bloggers, and human rights defenders in Italy. Of these, 64.3% were civil suits and 21.7% criminal defamation charges—neither of which would be covered by the current draft if they lack a cross-border element.
Public authorities themselves are frequent SLAPP plaintiffs in Italy: over 40% of recorded cases originate from government bodies, municipalities, or state-affiliated entities. This institutional misuse of litigation amplifies the chilling effect on investigative journalism and civic participation, according to press freedom monitors.
The Infringement Procedure and What Comes Next
The European Commission has issued formal letters of notice—letters of messa in mora in legal parlance—to Italy, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Germany, Ireland, Greece, Spain, Luxembourg, Hungary, Netherlands, Austria, Portugal, Romania, and Slovakia. Each country now has two months to respond with evidence of full transposition or a credible roadmap to complete the process. This response window closes in mid-September 2026.
If the Commission deems the response inadequate, it will issue a reasoned opinion (parere motivato), formally declaring the breach and setting a final compliance deadline. Persistent failure can lead to referral to the EU Court of Justice, which has the power to impose lump-sum fines and daily penalty payments that accrue until the member state brings its law into line. Under the Francovich doctrine, established by landmark EU case law, individuals who suffer harm due to a member state's failure to transpose a directive may also sue their own government for damages in national courts—a liability Italy could face if journalists or activists successfully argue they were left unprotected.
What the Directive Requires
To satisfy Brussels, Italy must ensure that its legislation guarantees the following minimum safeguards:
• Early dismissal mechanisms: Courts must reject SLAPP claims at an initial hearing if they are manifestly unfounded or disproportionate.
• Cost-shifting: Defendants who prevail in SLAPP cases must recover all reasonable legal expenses from the plaintiff.
• Security for costs: Judges may order plaintiffs to post a bond covering anticipated defense costs.
• Dissuasive sanctions: Member states must introduce penalties to deter abusive litigation.
• Accelerated procedures: Decisions on dismissal and security must be fast-tracked.
• Cross-border recognition: National courts must refuse to enforce foreign judgments obtained through SLAPP tactics.
What This Means for Journalists and Activists in Italy
For those working in journalism, advocacy, or public interest litigation in Italy, the practical consequences of incomplete transposition are immediate. Investigative reporters covering local corruption, environmental activists challenging infrastructure projects, and NGOs documenting human rights abuses remain vulnerable to costly, drawn-out litigation designed to exhaust their resources rather than resolve genuine legal disputes.
The autocensura phenomenon—journalists and editors avoiding topics perceived as legally risky—has been documented by multiple press freedom indexes, which rank Italy in the lower third of EU countries for media independence. SLAPP litigation exacerbates this dynamic, particularly in smaller newsrooms and civil society organizations that lack financial resources to absorb prolonged legal battles.
For freelance journalists, activists without institutional backing, and citizen reporters, a single SLAPP suit can be professionally ruinous. The directive's cost-shifting and early dismissal provisions are designed to level the playing field, but they remain inaccessible to most Italian targets under the current draft law.
What Residents Should Know: Practical Guidance
Understanding "Cross-Border" Cases
The current draft decree protects civil cases with cross-border elements. This includes:
• A defamation claim filed in Italy where the plaintiff is domiciled in another EU member state
• A claim filed against an Italian journalist or organization by a plaintiff in another EU country
• Cases involving defendants or plaintiffs physically located in different countries
Purely domestic cases—where both parties are Italian residents, the lawsuit is filed in Italian courts, and all connections are to Italy—are not covered by the draft decree.
Finding Legal Support in Italy
Several organizations provide specialized assistance for SLAPP defense:
• Osservatorio Ossigeno per l'Informazione: Monitors press freedom threats and provides resources for journalists. Visit www.ossigenoperlinformazione.it for documentation and guidance.
• CASE Italia (Coalition Against SLAPPs in Europe): Advocates for stronger protections and maintains a network of legal experts. Contact through their Italy chapter for referrals.
• Associazione Italiana Editori (AIE): Publishers' association offering legal support to member organizations facing SLAPP suits.
• Progetto Radere: Legal clinic specializing in media and expression rights, based in Rome and operating nationally.
• Legal Aid Centers (CAG - Centri di Assistenza Gratuita): Available in major cities; some now staff lawyers familiar with SLAPP defenses.
Documenting Your Case
If you face potential SLAPP litigation:
• Keep detailed records of all litigation costs and correspondence
• Document dates, amounts, and nature of intimidatory communications
• Preserve all evidence of your journalism or advocacy work
• Consult specialized counsel familiar with both Italian defamation law and EU directives
If Italy Fails to Transpose Fully
Under the Francovich principle, affected individuals may have grounds to seek damages from the Italian state if it fails to transpose the directive. Such claims are complex and require expert legal support, but represent a potential remedy for journalists or activists who suffer documented harm during the non-compliance period.
Timeline and Next Steps
The two-month response window closes in mid-September 2026. Italy's government must either finalize and notify Brussels of amended implementing decrees that cover domestic cases, or provide legal justification for the restricted scope—a position unlikely to satisfy the Commission given the directive's explicit purpose and the Council of Europe's broader recommendations.
Failure to act will almost certainly trigger a reasoned opinion by late 2026, with potential referral to the EU Court of Justice in early 2027. Previous infringement cases involving press freedom and rule-of-law issues have resulted in significant financial penalties, though the Commission typically calibrates them based on GDP and severity of breach.
For journalists, civil society organizations, and legal practitioners in Italy, the immediate priority is monitoring the government's response to Brussels and pressing for broader statutory protections. Several advocacy groups have launched public campaigns urging the Italian Parliament to amend Law 36/2026 before the decree enters into force, arguing that a minimalist transposition would represent a missed opportunity to address the country's SLAPP crisis comprehensively.
