What's Going on in Human Rights: March 2024

It's been a busy term for Amnesty. We've organised collaborations, begun our radio show, and made a start on our UoB divestment campaign. We're really excited for what's to come next term, so keep an eye out for that on our socials. For now we're enjoying the Easter break and we hope you are too.

Since we are campaigning around climate justice, it is useful to look at how other climate activists are being received in the UK. Collaboration between organisations is so integral to fighting climate change, so in this blog entry I will look beyond Amnesty, and focus on Greenpeace.

Recently Greenpeace has been engaged in a legal battle with Shell. The oil giant is suing the charity for $1m in damages, with costs that have the potential to run into the millions.

This is in response to a protest which took place in January 2023 where four Greenpeace activists boarded a platform north of the Canary Islands which was being transported to the Shetland Islands. They were holding signs which read 'Stop drilling - start paying.' The activists were asking that Shell ceases to drill for oil and gas, and instead puts its wealth and resources towards aiding the communities worst effected and most unable to respond to the climate crisis.

A number of prominent figures, including Greta Thunberg, and even stars like Emma Thompson, have spoken out against Shell's legal action. They argue that Shell should respect these activists' right to protest, especially given their very legitimate cause. Shell's spokespeople argued that their response was reasonable given that the actions of Greenpeace were 'unlawful and extremely dangerous'. However, I would argue that their response is disproportionate. This has been one of the biggest legal threats in Greenpeace's 50 year history, and over a protest which involved just four people. Furthermore, however dangerous these actions were, they are nothing compared to the existential threat that climate change poses, a threat which Shell is undoubtedly contributing to.

A Greenpeace campaigner said: 'The UK government should be leading the way towards a future without the fossil fuels it knows are driving a cost of living crisis at home and climate chaos around the world. But instead, oil giants like Shell are handed new exploration and drilling licences that will exacerbate both crises, while they throw lawsuits against climate groups who dare to challenge them.'

This comes after an overall crackdown on the right to protest in the UK. For example, the Police, Crime, Sentencing & Courts Act 2022 and the Public Order Act 2023 which Liberty, the UK's largest civil liberties organisation, has argued is part of a broader pattern of the government attacking democratic rights.

These laws create an unfairly low threshold to define what constitutes disruptive protesting, so from the outset planning demonstrations within these guidelines is difficult. The police can now stop protests taking place outside of major transport networks, oil and gas and energy supplies. This is particularly damaging to environmental protesters who may aim to hold oil and gas suppliers to account with the location of their protest.

What's more, there has been an introduction of new protest banning orders that would prevent individuals from attending protests at all. The police should not be able to bar people from exercising their civil right to demonstrate.

Even closer to home, in London, on October 30th 2023, more than 60 activists were arrested for protesting on Parliament Square for an end to oil and gas projects. The fact that so many were arrested for a peaceful protest, in what I would describe as the most appropriate protesting location in the country, seems hard to justify in a democracy.

---

By Charlie O'Keeffe