Latest News

UK judge dismisses case against climate activist who held up sign outside trial

An environment activist need to not be prosecuted for holding a placard outside a criminal court telling jurors they might acquit defendants according to their conscience, a judge in London ruled on Monday.

Retired social employee Trudi Warner, 69, was accused of contempt of court for standing outside London's Inner London Crown Court with the placard in 2015 ahead of a trial of environmental activists from the group Insulate Britain.

Her indication informed jurors that you have an outright right to acquit an offender according to your conscience, which Warner states she showed after a number of activists were disallowed from discussing climate modification as part of their defence in previous trials.

Britain's Lawyer General, one of the government's law officers, argued that Warner's protest was an attempt to disrupt the administration of justice by welcoming jurors to provide a specific verdict.

This, he argued at a hearing recently, totaled up to contempt of court, a criminal offense which can be punished by up to 2 years in jail and an unlimited fine.

But Judge Pushpinder Saini dismissed the case on Monday, saying a prosecution was a disproportionate technique which unlawfully interfered with Warner's right to flexibility of expression.

Warner said after the ruling: I simply wanted jurors to understand their rights and I desired jurors to be confident sufficient to be able to stand up to judges who were, in my viewpoint, acting unlawfully.

Asked if she would repeat her actions, Warner said: Most likely.

WIDER CRACKDOWN

The tried prosecution of Warner comes amidst a broader crackdown on demonstration motions in Britain and throughout Europe, as environmental activists use direct action demonstrations to demand immediate government action versus environment change.

Britain has provided cops broader powers to restrict peaceful protests, including by enforcing conditions if a demonstration could cause serious interruption to the life of the community, which is currently based on a legal challenge.

Ecological activists have in some cases protected themselves against charges of triggering criminal damage, without contesting having actually done so, arguing owners would have consented to the damage had they known the complete level of environment modification.

Last month, nevertheless, that defence was significantly cut by the Court of Appeal, which ruled activists accused of criminal damage can not depend on their political or philosophical beliefs.

Warner said outside court that the judgment had left activists with few legal defences, apart from jurors returning verdicts according to their conscience.

The power rests with us and this is why jurors are a hazard to the state, she said.

(source: Reuters)