CIVICUS speaks with Ilaria Masinara, Head of the Campaigning Unit at Amnesty International Italia, about escalating threats to freedom of expression and the media in Italy.
The far-right government of Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni is taking steps to restrict media autonomy, increase penalties for defamation, intimidate critics through a barrage of legal proceedings and prevent protests through harsh penalties for even minor offences. Growing civic space restrictions are drawing strong domestic and international criticism from journalists’ organisations, media outlets and civil society, who are mounting strong collective responses against the backlash.
How is the government restricting civic space?
Meloni’s government has proposed and enacted laws that criminalise dissent. In January 2024, it passed a law significantly increasing penalties for defacing cultural or private property, including during protests. The aim appeared to be to stifle peaceful protests and acts of civil disobedience. Another bill being debated in parliament – Bill 1,660, known as the Security bill – threatens the right to protest by criminalising protest tactics such as disrupting traffic, introducing vaguely defined offences that leave room for arbitrary enforcement and imposing disproportionate punishments for relatively minor offences.
In response to the growing pressure on press freedom, in May the Media Freedom Rapid Response consortium, a civil society coalition that monitors media freedoms and reacts to violations in European Union (EU) member states and candidate countries, organised an emergency mission to Italy. But despite our best efforts, we were unable to secure a meeting with any government officials. The authorities refuse to engage on these critical issues.
Finally, there is an ongoing parliamentary debate on proposed changes to the defamation law. While the new law would abolish prison sentences for defamation, it would also increase fines and impose professional suspensions of up to six months. Journalists are already under pressure because of the number of SLAPPs – strategic lawsuits against public participation – they face under existing civil and criminal defamation laws. The proposed changes could deepen this trend and further deter journalists from carrying out important investigative work.
Who uses SLAPPs and why?
SLAPPs are lawsuits filed primarily to intimidate or silence people or organisations that engage publicly with important issues, rather than to resolve genuine legal disputes. They typically target journalists, and civil society organisations and activists who expose or criticise powerful people or organisations involved in controversial or unethical activities.
SLAPPs use the legal system to impose heavy financial and emotional burdens on those who speak out. For example, when journalists investigate and report on the misconduct of powerful corporations or government officials, these entities often retaliate by filing defamation lawsuits. These lawsuits are often expensive and time-consuming, forcing journalists and their organisations to divert resources from their investigative work. The mere threat of a lawsuit can deter people from publishing critical information or engaging in activism.
The use of SLAPPs is a serious violation of fundamental human rights, including the right to freedom of expression, the right to participate in public life and the right to a fair trial. Amnesty International works to combat this abuse of the legal system. In February, we endorsed a press release from the Coalition Against SLAPPs in Europe welcoming the European Parliament’s adoption of the Anti-SLAPP Directive. This Directive sets minimum standards for the protection of watchdogs from abusive litigation and aims to prevent the misuse of legal processes to stifle free speech. It is now up to EU member states to build on this Directive by enacting robust national legislation to protect against SLAPPs.
How have journalists reacted to proposed changes to defamation laws?
Journalists have reacted proactively and collectively. They perceived the proposed changes as a direct threat to their ability to carry out their work freely and without undue fear of retribution, and used their established networks to mobilise in the defence of freedom of expression and media freedom. They have also rallied in support of colleagues who have been called to justify their reporting before regulatory commissions, a process that can be intimidating and punitive.
Journalists’ unions, particularly the Federazione Nazionale Stampa Italiana (FNSI) and the Unione Sindacale Giornalisti Rai, have also consistently stood up to threats and attacks, including against individual journalists. They have shown a strong commitment to defending press freedom and protecting their members from intimidation and harassment. Following repeated attacks by the government, they boycotted the prime minister’s end-of-year press conference in December 2023. This was an important step to highlight their discontent and resist the ongoing repression.
FNSI General Secretary Alessandra Costante echoed the sentiments of many in the journalistic community when she said that attacking a media outlet for its work is fundamentally anti-democratic and undermines the constitutional principle of information pluralism.
Are these restrictions part of a wider global pattern?
The current trends in Italy are part of a wider global pattern of autocratisation. Amnesty International’s 2021 report shows how political leaders in countries as diverse as Brazil, Hungary, India, Turkey and the USA have increasingly used narratives of fear and division to consolidate power and advance their agendas.
These leaders often play on societal fears and use particular groups as scapegoats for broader social and economic problems, fostering a divisive ‘us versus them’ mentality. This strategy exacerbates polarisation within societies and shifts political discourse towards simplistic, extreme solutions that undermine democratic principles and human rights.
The normalisation of these authoritarian practices is often accompanied by the enactment of laws or policies that ostensibly uphold human rights but in reality serve to entrench repressive regimes. The global shift towards autocratic governance poses a significant challenge to international human rights mechanisms and the overall concept of human rights.
In Italy, as in many other countries, these authoritarian tendencies manifest themselves in efforts to control information and stifle dissent. Authoritarian leaders justify their repression by demonising particular groups, such as religious minorities, migrants, refugees, LGBTQI+ people and human rights activists. Restricting public freedoms serves to consolidate their power.
Information control is key in the authoritarian playbook. Authoritarian leaders manipulate what the public sees, hears and reads to shape attitudes and beliefs and thus prevent any potential threats to their power. Technological advances have made information control more efficient and widespread by reducing its cost and increasing its reach.
Civic space in Italy is rated ‘narrowed’ by the CIVICUS Monitor.
Get in touch with Amnesty International through its website or Instagram page, and follow @amnesty on Twitter.
