MAJIEDT J environmental legislation.42 Those most commonly at the receiving end of defamation SLAPP suits are media institutions, whistleblowers, and activists. SLAPP suits in all spheres, but particularly in the context of public interest environmental litigation, evince a deeper contestation in society. It is the manifestation of the increasing contest between the competing interests of developers pursing their property rights, and environmentalists pursuing conservation objectives. These lawsuits demonstrate the need for a balance between competing rights such as freedom of expression, right to privacy, and the right to property. [45] SLAPP suit defences have been introduced by legislation in some foreign jurisdictions, primarily on the basis that SLAPP suits impede freedom of expression.43 Thus, for example, in California, the Code of Civil Procedure pertinently declares that it is intended to protect the American constitutional right to free speech in the context of participation in matters of public significance.44 And in Canada, the anti-SLAPP legislation is aimed at mitigating the harmful effects of strategic lawsuits against public participation, utilised not as a direct tool to vindicate a bona fide claim, but as an indirect tool to limit the expression and deter that party, or other potential interested parties, 42 Section 24 of the Constitution provides: “Everyone has the right to: (a) an environment which is not harmful to their health or wellbeing; (b) have the environment protected for the benefit of present and future generations through reasonable legislative and other measures that— (i) prevent pollution and ecological degradation; (ii) promote conservation; and (iii) secure ecologically sustainable development and use of natural resources, while promoting justifiable economic and social development.” Section 2(4)(f) of the National Environmental Management Act 107 of 1998 (NEMA) reads: “The participation of all interested and affected parties in environmental governance must be promoted, and all people must have the opportunity to develop the understanding, skills and capacity necessary for achieving equitable and effective participation, and participation by vulnerable and disadvantaged persons must be ensured.” 43 Most notably, in California, SLAPP suits are regulated by section 425.16 of the Code of Civil Procedure; in British Columbia, Canada, SLAPP suits are regulated by the Protection of Public Participation Act, 2019; in Ontario, Canada, of application is the Protection of Public Participation Act, 2015; and in the Australian Capital Territory, SLAPP suits are regulated by the Public Participation Act, 2008. 44 Section 425.16(a) of the Code of Civil Procedure. 21