How SLAPP lawsuits silence critics in Switzerland's courts

Swiss NGOs fight back against SLAPP suits silencing free speech

Wealthy firms and individuals are increasingly using legal threats to silence critics in Switzerland. Known as SLAPP suits—strategic lawsuits against public participation—these claims are often baseless but designed to drain resources and intimidate. One high-profile case involves the Bruno Manser Fonds, which has spent eight years fighting a defamation claim widely seen as an attempt to stifle its work.

The Bruno Manser Fonds has faced a protracted legal battle since 2016, spending nearly half a million francs on defence costs in just the first two years. The case is a textbook example of a SLAPP suit, where the burden of litigation itself becomes a weapon against critics.

Between 2018 and 2023, Swiss NGOs reported 42 SLAPP cases, with law firms, mining, energy, and agriculture companies among the most frequent plaintiffs. Eleven organizations alone faced 11 lawsuits and 17 legal threats during this period. Greenpeace, among others, has admitted to scaling back publications due to the fear of costly litigation.

Switzerland's legal system can worsen the problem by allowing cases to drag on for years, compounding financial and psychological pressure. In response, the Anti-SLAPP Alliance—a coalition of NGOs—was formed two years ago to push for reforms. Anina Dalbert, a lawyer with Public Eye, has called for faster dismissal of clearly abusive claims.

The EU took action in 2024 by adopting binding directives against SLAPPs, forcing plaintiffs who file abusive suits to cover all legal costs. Swiss campaigners now hope for similar protections at home.

The Bruno Manser Fonds case highlights how SLAPP suits can tie up NGOs in costly legal battles for years. With 42 recorded cases since 2018, Swiss campaigners are pushing for reforms to block abusive lawsuits early. The EU's recent directives may add pressure for Switzerland to follow suit.