Sanitising racism in Ian Fleming’s novels might have made headlines this week, but we’re more interested in a different spy-related controversy.
 
The name’s Bill – National Security Bill – and this week it’s been both shaken and stirred in its report stage in the House of Lords. The piece of legislation aims to overhaul the UK’s spying laws, and journalists are in the crosshairs. If the bill goes through, anyone obtaining or sharing “protected information” that could benefit foreign powers could be at risk of a lifetime prison sentence. No distinction is made between state secrets and “non-classified” government material, so journalists digging into embarrassing government details could be criminalised, especially if their organisations have received funding from foreign donors. To be clear the bill currently has no public interest defence for whistleblowers and journalists. If it goes through, imagine the things we might never know.
 
The government says that the bill brings “vital new measures to protect our national security”. Index’s policy officer and resident National Security Bill buff, Nik Williams, has a rather different view: "The National Security Bill represents a severe threat to investigative journalism in the UK, equating the acts of reporters with those of spies. While the government has acknowledged the bill's impact, their response is insufficient. Index is part of a coalition opposing the bill and will continue to ensure that reporters are not criminalised for doing their job."
 
In an op-ed for The Telegraph he expands on everything that’s wrong with the bill.
 
Last week, the government made some amendments to the bill to protect journalistic freedom and made assurances that the measures are not targeted at journalists. While we’re usually big fans of words, in this instance words are not enough. Legislation needs to be robust enough that it is safe in the hands of any future government.
 
We are taking action. Index, along with colleagues at openDemocracy, the National Union of Journalists and Reporters Without Borders, formed a coalition last year, to raise our voices for journalists. Back in November, Martin Bright outlined exactly why we need to stop the legislation that threatens our democracy. We and the coalition will continue fighting. For journalism, it is no time to die.
 
On the topic of silencing investigative journalists, now might be a good time to reiterate our support for Carole Cadwalladr. Another act in the long-running saga of Arron Banks’s legal action concluded this week, when the courts dismissed the majority of his appeal, which we and the UK Anti-SLAPP Coalition have long deemed as a SLAPP (strategic lawsuit against public participation), aimed to intimidate and silence. We, and others, stand behind Cadwalladr.
 
While we haven’t travelled far from home for this week’s newsletter, there are more global stories on our radar. Nigeria’s election results have finally been counted, with Bola Tinubu of the ruling All Progressives Congress party taking the presidency, while his main challengers said they will contest the results. The elections have not been without violence. Last week, the Labour Party senatorial candidate for Enugu East, Victor Oyibo Chukwu, was assassinated. Nigerian novelist Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie wrote a moving piece for the New York Times about pride in fellow Nigerians, and the need for radical election transparency.
 
Moving back into the world of SLAPPs, we leave you with a piece of semi-good news. The Swedish business and finance publication Realtid can finally say hejdå (goodbye) to the SLAPPs case against them, after they agreed a settlement with businessman Svante Kumlin, who took legal action over articles about his company.
 
The UK Anti-SLAPP Coalition (including Index) largely welcomed the news, but reminded us why these cases are so important to stamp out: “Realtid and their journalists have paid dearly to defend their public interest reporting, not only financially, but in time and energy also. They will never be made whole.”
 
Katie Dancey-Downs
Assistant Editor at Index

Regulating political advertising in Europe threatens freedom of expression

The European Union is finally taking its first steps into trying to come up with rules which will seek to regulate exactly how political advertising can work inside the union. As it is currently drafted, the new proposal could have a huge chilling effect both for Europeans and for those who rely on the EU’s protection of expression. Read what our CEO Ruth Anderson has to say about the proposals in her weekly blog post here.

Come to the cabaret

Kyiv came to London this week, as Francis Clarke joined the audience at Bunker Cabaret by the Ukrainian art collective Hooligan Art Community. As it says on the tin, the show started in bomb shelters in Kyiv and is now touring. Read his review here, which also outlines the challenges of art in a time of war more generally and Putin’s war specifically.

Academically speaking

Students should be encouraged to challenge ideas and question the world around them. Higher education is meant to teach us how to think freely, and for ourselves. Yet a new report might not come as a surprise to many readers – academic freedom is in peril. Marnie Duke digs into what’s happening for speech on campus.

Conference, 23 March, Dublin: 
SLAPPS: A Threat to Our Freedom of Expression and Our Democracy

Strategic lawsuits against public participation (SLAPPs) are brought by powerful and wealthy entities against public watchdogs in an effort to compel them to withhold or remove critical coverage, even if it is accurate and in the public interest.

How do SLAPPs work and, crucially, what can we do to stop them? At this full-day conference, attendees will hear from lawyers, journalists, academics, politicians, and campaigners, as well as from keynote speakers, UN Special Rapporteur Mary Lawlor, and human rights campaigner Bill Browder.

Reserve your in-person or online livestream ticket here.