On 18th July 2024, Judge Christopher Hehir sentenced five defendants convicted of conspiracy to cause a public nuisance for coordinating direct action protests on the M25 over four days in November 2022.
One defendant received a sentence of 5 years; the other four defendants received sentences of 4 years imprisonment.
The case sparked immediate commentary and has very much divided public opinion.
Michel Forst, the UN’s special rapporteur on environmental defenders said:
“Today is a dark day for peaceful environmental protest.
This sentence should shock the conscience of any member of the public. It should also put all of us on high alert on the state of civic rights and freedoms in the United Kingdom.
Rulings like today’s set a very dangerous precedent, not just for environmental protest but any form of peaceful protest that may, at one point or another, not align with the interests of the government of the day.”
Greenpeace UK’s programme director, Amy Cameron, said:
“What sort of country locks people away for years for planning a peaceful demonstration, let alone for talking about it on a Zoom call? We’re giving a free hand to the polluting elite robbing us of a habitable planet while jailing those who’re trying to stop them – it makes no sense.
These sentences are not a one-off anomaly but the culmination of years of repressive legislation, overblown government rhetoric and a concerted assault on the right of juries to deliberate according to their conscience. It’s part of the mess the Labour government has inherited from its predecessor and they must fix it by giving back to people the right to protest that’s been slowly being taken away from them.”
Others applauded the strict approach to sentencing with a reminder of the harm caused by the motorway disruption, such as:
- Missed flights & holidays
- Missed funeral Missed school mock exams
- Missed hospital appointment for a cancer patient
- Loss income due to being unable to work
- Missed food delivery at a hospital
Whilst this is not the first-time heavy sentencing have been handed out for this type of disruptive process, these are believed to be the longest sentences to date, with a clear intention to deter others from the same sort of protest tactics. Whether that will work remains to be seen.
An appeal is almost inevitable and would be welcomed by many. It would allow the Court of Appeal to carefully consider this case and set the tone for any future cases of its kind.