UN recommends disruption of traffic with non-violent protest activity

Many countries are now using the justice system to penalize non-violent climate justice activists and the UN has also made clear recommendations, UN A/76/222: Exercise of the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association as essential to advancing climate justice.

The UN effectively begs everyone and especially non-violent climate activists to drive the necessary change: “civil society is to a great extent the only reliable motor for driving institutions to change at the pace required”.(9)

• Prison sentences for non-violent protest activity are always disproportionate. (65)

• States (countries (leave)) unjustly undermine the climate justice movement with criminal prosecution and legal harassment. (29,30) In many countries, such charges are brought under national security-related laws, including laws penalizing sabotage, sedition and terrorism. (31)

• A certain level of disruption of ordinary life, including disruption of traffic, annoyances and inconveniences to which business activities are subjected must be tolerated if the right to freedom of peaceful assembly is not to be deprived of meaning. In the words of the Human Rights Committee, “(p)rivate entities and broader society may be expected to accept some level of disruption as a result of the exercise of the right”. (62)

Longer summary:

“climate activists are sometimes depicted as dangerous radicals. But the truly dangerous radicals are the countries that are increasing the production of fossil fuels.", António Guterres. UN Secretary-General, April 7, 2022, IPCC Report

The UN effectively begs both states and non-violent climate activists to continue: “civil society is to a great extent the only reliable motor for driving institutions to change at the pace required”.(9)

1. The window of opportunity to address the climate crisis and its impacts is rapidly closing. States cannot address it alone, but also need individuals that can organize, mobilize and shape public opinion and decision making, without fear. Ensuring that such contributions can be made requires full enjoyment of the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association. (8)

2. States have targeted climate activists unjustly (29,30) using laws penalizing sabotage, sedition and terrorism (31).

3. A certain level of disruption of ordinary life, including disruption of traffic, annoyances and inconveniences to which business activities are subjected must be tolerated if the right to freedom of peaceful assembly is not to be deprived of meaning. In the words of the Human Rights Committee, “(p)rivate entities and broader society may be expected to accept some level of disruption as a result of the exercise of the right”. (62)

4. The Special Rapporteur has emphasized that road blocking is a legitimate means of protesting, which has long been central to social movements around the world. (63)

5. Prison sentences for non-violent protest activity are always disproportionate. (65)

6. Instead of developing new ways to restrict the rights of civil society actors and limit their impact on policy, States should respond to climate justice protests and advocacy by magnifying the voices of advocates and ensuring that their concerns are taken fully on board, including within the framework of State policy on the local, regional, national and international levels and within the context of business endeavours.

The reports recommendations to states (all countries) include:

1. "Recognize publicly at the highest levels the work of civil society and the importance of the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association as essential to the advancement of climate action and just transition" (90(a))

2. "States should amend laws criminalizing road blocking as a form of peaceful protest." (90(b))

State Repression

UK: 'the Solicitor General, Michael Tomlinson KC, has concluded that it is a prosecutable offence for a climate campaigner, Trudi Warner to hold up a sign outside a criminal court, simply proclaiming one of the fundamental principles of the common law; the right of a jury to decide a case according to its conscience.'
https://barristermagazine.com/we-are-all-trudi-warner-promoting-the-rights-of-jurors-in-the-twenty-first-century/

References:

https://www.ohchr.org/en/documents/thematic-reports/a76222-exercise-rights-freedom-peaceful-assembly-and-association

Case References:

Success in Australia with UN HRC Torres Strait Island

https://www.hrlc.org.au/human-rights-case-summaries/un-human-rights-committee-finds-australia-violated-torres-strait-islanders-human-rights-over-climate-inaction

Other useful References:

Litigation4 Mitigation: goal to make copy and paste forms for litigation against governments

http://climatecasechart.com/non-us-case-category/ghg-emissions-reduction-and-trading/

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/dec/20/big-oil-is-behind-conspiracy-to-deceive-public-first-climate-racketeering-lawsuit-says

Swedish High Court Book Thomas Bull useful extracts

Home of FridayforFuture Workgroups, Manuals and Documents

Version Information
Draft: Janine O'Keeffe 2022, December, based on early work with Petter K and Scientist Rebellion Sweden team.