MUT loses defamation case against rival union

The Malta Union of Teachers and its president, Marco Bonnici, have failed in their defamation suit against the Union of Professional Educators over claims published online. In In its ruling, the court upheld the importance of free expression in public discourse between competing unions.

The MUT had claimed that a publication by UPE on 11 November, 2023, made false and damaging statements aimed at undermining its credibility during a critical period of industrial negotiations. Specifically, the MUT accused UPE of suggesting that the MUT had accepted financial proposals from the government and that the announced strike on 27 November, 2023, was a mere demonstration of power.

The MUT argued that these statements were defamatory, harming its reputation and reducing members' trust. The UPE, in its defence, maintained that the statements constituted fair comment on matters of public interest, reflecting its honest opinion and reasonable belief about ongoing negotiations.

The court examined the evidence, including statements made by the MUT and UPE, and focused on determining whether the statements were inherently defamatory and if they caused serious harm to the MUT's reputation.

The Court emphasised that defamation law, under Malta's Media and Defamation Act, requires proof of serious harm or potential serious harm to reputation, a threshold that also applies to organisations such as trade unions. Furthermore, it considered the balance between protecting reputation and safeguarding freedom of expression, especially in the context of public debate involving competing unions.

Ultimately, the court, presided by Magistrate Rachel Montebello, ruled that the statements did not constitute defamation. It noted that the comments were part of a broader critique within a competitive environment between the two unions. The claims lacked the intent or effect of causing serious reputational damage to the MUT or Bonnici. Additionally, the MUT failed to demonstrate significant harm, such as financial loss or a tangible decline in its public standing.

The judgment concluded that MUT, as a trade union not operating for profit, could not claim damages for financial harm under the relevant defamation laws. Moreover, it did not provide sufficient evidence to establish that the alleged defamation seriously impacted its reputation or Bonnici's personal credibility. Thus, the court dismissed the MUT's claims and ordered it to bear the costs of the proceedings.