Media, journalists and academia call for Alberta Govt. to adopt anti-SLAPP legislation

newsdesk@medicinehatnews.com A coalition of Canadian journalists, media organizations and academic institutions, including the News, have signed an open letter urging the Alberta government to adopt legislation that protects against the use of legal threats to stifle criticism. Several Canadian provinces already have legislation that protects against what are called strategic lawsuits against public participation, or The post Media, journalists and academia call for Alberta Govt. to adopt anti-SLAPP legislation appeared first on Medicine Hat News .

By MEDICINE HAT NEWS on July 14, 2026. newsdesk@medicinehatnews.com A coalition of Canadian journalists, media organizations and academic institutions, including the News, have signed an open letter urging the Alberta government to adopt legislation that protects against the use of legal threats to stifle criticism.

Several Canadian provinces already have legislation that protects against what are called strategic lawsuits against public participation, or SLAPP lawsuits. SLAPP lawsuits are illegitimate lawsuits filed with the intent of overwhelming a media outlet, journalist, or other kind of public critic in legal fees and processes, with the effect of silencing their criticism. “The intent of the whole thing is to penalize opponents and dissuade criticism,” says Canadian Association of Journalists national president Brent Jolly.

“To me, that’s quite incompatible with what a court of justice and a court of law should be entrusted with in terms of its day-to-day functions.” In one prominent Alberta example, opposition leader Naheed Nenshi was hit with a SLAPP lawsuit as mayor of Calgary in 2013, when real estate developer Cal Wenzel sued him for defamation after Nenshi made a comment comparing a home builders meeting to a scene from the Godfather. The suit was later dismissed and Nenshi’s legal fees were reimbursed by a city committee.

They can cost tens or hundreds of thousands in fees, a crippling sum for many individuals and media outlets. Jolly says anti-SLAPP legislation is a necessary safeguard that allows people to feel comfortable voicing concern and expressing factual criticisms that serve the public interest. In other provinces, anti-SLAPP legislation provides critics the opportunity to explain to a judge how their work serves the public interest.

The judge can then make a determination as to whether there is a legitimate concern regarding defamation, and if the defendant has a valid defence. He points to Ontario and British Columbia as examples of jurisdictions with robust anti-SLAPP legislation. Both provinces implemented laws that define public interest broadly, enable defendants to file a motion to dismiss the lawsuit in its earliest stages, and impose possible damages for bad-faith litigation.

If a lawsuit is dismissed, defendants are able to recover 100 per cent of their legal costs. “It’s really straightforward, and it would be a far better use of taxpayer dollars. It would clear up a lot of frankly wasteful and vexatious or random suits that come before the courts and prevent it from actually doing its job,” said Jolly.