To what extent can I lawfully critique a public figure?
 

Authors: 

H Fowler 
 

Summary: 

In the growing technological and digital landscape, the expression of ideas, thoughts, and statements has the capacity to reach a larger audience than previously imagined.  As a result, reputational damage has become easier to inflict than ever before. This has led to a surplus in defamation claims instituted by public figures – notably the President of the United States, Donald Trump, and the Hollywood personalities Harvey Weinstein and Johnny Depp. A South African example is former President Jacob Zuma. Evidently, defamation claims by public figures are prevalent. This article challenges a public figure’s ability to bring such claims by evaluating a recently recognised species of litigation in South African law, known as SLAPP (“strategic litigation against public participation”) suits.  This is a term used to describe claims that are brought under the guise of a bona fide defamation allegation but whose true agenda is to prevent criticism levelled against a company.  This article advocates for this doctrine to apply equally to public figures, and, in so doing, undertakes a comparative analysis of South African and American jurisprudence on defamation.  The article argues that public figures have greater means than other people to encroach on freedom of expression in bringing defamation claims and that allowing such claims to succeed can silence legitimate criticism and prevent matters of public importance from ever reaching the public.

Link to journal article