1. Is it a legal action? 
   1.1 SLAPPs can be filed in Court, but also include other tactics like cease and desist letters, letters of demand, defamation threats (concerns notice), legal letters exaggerating costs and other legal threats – all of these are legal actions under our definition of SLAPPs and SLAPP tactics.  
   
2. Is the legal action brought by a party with more significant financial, structural or political power?
   2.1 Alleged perpetrators are considered to have structural power.
   
   NOTE: This component reflects the power imbalance at the heart of SLAPPs
   
3. Does the legal action target an act(s) of public participation?
   3.1 Public participation is any act taken to:
   3.1.1 Influence public opinion or raise awareness on a matter of public interest, or
   3.1.2 Prompt action by the public, a corporation, or government on a matter of public interest, or
   3.1.3 Speak out against injustice, discrimination or wrongdoing, including gender-based violence, or
   3.1.4 Undertake an existing legal right, including those recognised under international human rights obligations, such as the right to access information.

NOTE: Public participation is vital to our democracy and helps everyday people hold power to account. It is a broad term that can encompass any effort to engage in: journalism, advocacy, whistleblowing, peaceful protest or boycotts, activism, or speaking out against abuse of power. 

4. Is the legal action reasonably likely to have the effect of silencing, discouraging or shutting down the acts of public participation?
   4.1 A number of qualities can indicate if a legal action is likely to have the above effect. These include the following:
   4.1.1 The legal action is a disproportionate response to the SLAPP target’s actions;
   4.1.2 The SLAPP target has fewer financial or organisational resources than the powerful actor;
   4.1.3 The powerful actor engages in procedural manoeuvres which unreasonably prolong proceedings and/or drive up costs;
   4.1.4 The legal action appears to be part of a wider campaign to bully, harass, or intimidate the SLAPP target, target communities and/or third-party critics;
   4.1.5 The powerful actor files multiple or coordinated lawsuits, including crossborder actions often in complex areas of law;
   4.1.6 The powerful actor uses repeated, excessive or unnecessary compulsory court processes (discovery of documents, subpoenas, joinder of parties to litigation), likely intimidating or draining the other side’s resources and the resources of their associates;
   4.1.7 The powerful party seeks damages that are disproportionate to any real harm;
   4.1.8 The powerful actor has a history of SLAPPs and/or legal intimidation.
   

NOTE: Many of these are tactics designed to maximise the ability of the legal action to intimidate and harass the target. By suing the individual journalist or activist, for example, the powerful actor leaves the SLAPP target isolated and exposed — raising the possibility they will be intimidated into silence. 

This silencing effect is amplified when such tactics target marginalised communities — including First Nations people, migrants and victim-survivors — who already face increased barriers to participating equally in society.

** The criteria is subject to review every 12 months.