Posted by 
LONDON — British climate protesters from the Just Stop Oil group have largely failed in a mass appeal against tough sentences, in a major judgment that will have repercussions for British law and activism.
The 16 activists, part of the anti-fossil fuels campaign group, were appealing against jail sentences in four cases.
Two of the appeals, including for two protesters who threw soup at Vincent van Gogh’s “Sunflowers” in a 2022 demonstration, were dismissed outright.
Six other appellants succeeded in gaining minor reductions in their jail terms, including Just Stop Oil figurehead Roger Hallam. In her judgment at the Court of Appeal, Lord Chief Justice Sue Carr called their sentences “manifestly excessive.”
Hallam’s sentence, handed down for organizing a blockade on Britain’s busiest motorway, was cut from five to four years.
But supporters of Just Stop Oil and some legal scholars said that, by upholding long sentences in every case, the Court of Appeal had only added its weight to the erosion of a long-standing principle of leniency for non-violent activism in U.K. law.
“The most important outcome is that the Court of Appeal has maintained draconian prison terms for non-violent protesters,” said Graeme Hayes, a sociologist and expert in legal approaches to protest at Aston University.
The judgment “clearly seeks to deter peaceful disruptive protest and support the authoritarian turn in British politics to weaken liberal democratic rights,” Hayes argued.
Traditionally, non-violent protests that broke the law in the U.K. have been punished with — at worst — non-custodial sentences.
But a recent rise in disruptive and destructive protest among climate activists, in groups like Just Stop Oil and Extinction Rebellion, has met with tougher policing and, experts say, some of the longest sentences ever handed out for non-violent activism.
‘Sunflowers’ appeal dismissed
Public frustration with climate groups has grown as their methods of protest have become increasingly spectacular, annoying and disruptive.
Last year, Prime Minister Keir Starmer, a former human rights barrister and director of public prosecutions, called for protesters who block roads or target cultural events and icons to face the full force of the law.
On Friday, Shadow Justice Secretary Robert Jenrick said: “It is disappointing that these radical disruptors have had their sentences reduced. This judgment undermines deterrence and risks sending a dangerous message.”
But Just Stop Oil supporters said it sent the exact opposite message. The Court of Appeal “very clearly upheld the principle of long prison sentences for peaceful protest — far longer than the starting point for serious sexual assault,” said Tim Crossland, a legal expert from the Defend our Juries campaign.
In a 44-page judgment, the judges did, however, push back on the longest of the sentences, citing the need to balance freedoms of assembly and expression when meting out punishment.
Carr also said treating earlier Just Stop Oil cases as a precedent for sentencing risked “undesirable and unwarranted sentence inflation.”
Another protester, Gaie Delap, was given a two-months reduction in her sentence because of “onerous bail conditions,” which the judges said should have been taken into account.
Delap was recently released to home detention, a process delayed for weeks because the prison service could not find a tracking tag that would fit the wrists of the 78-year-old.
Hayes said: “On the face of it, this is a positive step. It is important that the Court of Appeal recognises the conscientiousness of non-violent protesters in deciding culpability. But this is also a minimum step.”
“The really chilling thing,” according to Crossland, was the decision to dismiss the appeal of Anna Holland and Phoebe Plummer, the protesters who threw soup at van Gogh’s masterpiece in 2022.
The pair had challenged a judge’s finding that they should be sentenced as violent protesters because the assault of a culturally-valuable object should be considered a form of violence. Holland and Plummer were jailed for 20 and 24 months last year, but have since been released under conditions. Carr rejected their argument.
Plummer was due to read a statement outside the court, but was dissuaded by a heavy police presence, according to a Just Stop Oil legal support group.
Dented
As Carr read a summary of the decision in a room in the Royal Courts of Justice in London, around twenty activists inside the court removed their jackets to reveal t-shirts that read: “CORRUPTION IN COURT.”
The appellants must now weigh whether to take their appeal to the European Court of Human Rights. Should the protesters do so and lose, it might set a precedent in every country in which the court holds jurisdiction.
Outside the courthouse, a clutch of supporters were outnumbered by police in vans parked nearby.
Some were processing what the judgment meant for them in real time.
Cynthia, an octogenarian who did not want to give her full name, said: “I think people’s confidence is already a bit dented, and I think there’s going to be a bigger dent.”
“I get angrier and angrier,” said Juliet Nolan, a teacher. Nolan’s family, who are mixed race, “will not show up to protest without a huge sense of unease nowadays.”
Anna Musgrave, who works at an environmental NGO, had brought her eight-year-old daughter Olive, and two of Olive’s friends, who were proudly displaying outsized signs. Musgrave said: “We’re just worried about the threat to democracy and what it means for all of our — but particularly these young children’s — futures.”
Others were defiant.
Marly Lyman, a member of Defend our Juries, said: “I don’t think it will be demoralizing, because people are kind of expecting it. … I think it will be motivating.”
Emilio Casalicchio contributed reporting.
