Destruction of democracy in the UK in silencing climate change campaigners

A shocking threat to rights of free speech in the UK has just occurred. This is not just about the right of free speech, it also about climate change in how governments deal with it. 

The UK is edging towards a fascist state as far as I'm concerned. This latest criminal court judgement supports my thinking.  Please read Hallam's enormous tweet which is at the end of this article. You get first hand reporting. The judge was arrogant and wrong. Very wrong.

I can't find the judge's reasoning. I think he referred to the campaigners as 'fanatics'. I also think he was very biased against them and it would not surprise me if he did not believe that climate change exists and drives an enormous SUV. Yes, I am pissed off with this judge. It is not just me.

The former lord chancellor, Lord Falconer of Thoroton said that he was 'uncomfortable' with the sentences although Sir Robert Buckland said they were justified.

This judge handed down a 5 year jail sentence to a peaceful protestor in the UK who campaigns for action against global warming by Michael Broad

--------------

A record five-year jail term has been handed out to Roger Hallam, 58, for coordinating the climate change protests under the Just Stop Oil banner which disrupted the M25 in London over four days in 2022. 

45 protesters climbed gantries on the motorway, forcing police to stop the traffic. Four others, campaigners in the Just Stop Oil organisation, were each jailed for four years. They were found guilty of conspiring to cause a public nuisance under a new draconian law which curbs free-speech and peaceful protest.

This is controversial legislation introduced by the previous government to get tough on disruptive tactics used by environmental protesters. They were charged under the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act 2022.

There is shock over this sentence which is a record for a person engaged in peaceful protest. Yes, I will capitalise that: PEACEFUL PROTEST.

What do the public think about the record jail sentences for Just Stop Oil activists?

Our nationally representative poll found 61% of people in Britain think the sentences were too harsh. Only 12% felt they were too lenient. Read more here: https://t.co/InHH5BAAjf https://t.co/CNkpeXtAEY pic.twitter.com/4fiIucxfQG

— Social Change Lab (@SocChangeLab) July 19, 2024

The previous Conservative government got their knickers in a twist over these Just Stop Oil protests because they were very disruptive. That made them effective. These campaigners felt that they had to be disruptive in order to make their statement clear to everybody. That's the nature of a peaceful protest. But the right wing government now ousted by Labour, decided to clampdown on them and at the same time clampdown on free speech. And also at the same time to ignore climate change.

It's utterly shocking to people like me. And to Chris Packham, the naturalist and broadcaster. He said that the sentence of five years handed down to Roger Hallam, was a threat to free speech and he has called for a meeting with Richard Hermer KC, the attorney general, "as rapidly as possible so that we could address this grotesque miscarriage of justice".

He also said that we need to be "clear, be very very clear this is not just about climate activism. The laws that have been drafted, the injustices that are being wrought, threaten all rights of free speech. We stand here today because our future security may be compromised by the reckless and irresponsible erosion of human rights, of our fundamental freedoms. I stand here because I believe this represents the direct theft of our freedom, the destruction of our democracy, the deliberate and calculated intimidation of our protesters, and that, unless we resist this, the very real danger is our species will destroy life on earth will stop"

He's of course referring to climate change which really concerns him as it should concern all of us. He is a conservationist. He was to protect wildlife which is increasingly under dire threat across the globe because of global warming.

The sentencing is particularly grotesque as this government has decided to release criminals after 40% of their sentence. The country is releasing genuine criminals early in order to make room in overcrowded prisons while at the same time clearly, over-punishing genuine people who are concerned about the future of humankind on this planet. It is BONKERS.

There have been calls to repeal the above-mentioned act. The sentence was also criticised by Tom Southerden, Amnesty International UK's law and human rights adviser. He wants the act repealed. He said that "These lengthy jail sentences for people seeking climate justice should increase the alarm over the ongoing crackdown against peaceful protest in this country, which violates all our human rights. With our overcrowded prison system already described as a ticking timebomb by the new Lord Chancellor these jail terms are all the more indefensible."

The judge who handed down this grotesque sentence is Judge Christopher Hehir. Shame on him. He is not worthy to be a judge.

Update:

Hallam said this (and a lot more - see his tweet below):

The crime? 

Giving a talk on civil disobedience as an effective, evidence-based method for stopping the elite from putting enough carbon in the atmosphere to send us to extinction. I have given hundreds of similar speeches encouraging nonviolent action and have never been arrested for it. This time I was an advisor to the M25 motorway disruption, recommending the action to go ahead to wake up the British public to societal collapse.

His tweet:

I've just been sentenced to 5 years in prison.

The longest ever for nonviolent action.

The 'crime'?

Giving a talk on civil disobedience as an effective, evidence-based method for stopping the elite from putting enough carbon in the atmosphere to send us to extinction.

I have… pic.twitter.com/U2dHaDQkGf

— Roger Hallam (@RogerHallamCS21) July 18, 2024

From Just Stop Oil:

Professor McGuire, Emeritus Professor of Geophysical & Climate Hazards at University College London, said:

“The trial and verdict were a farce. They mark a low point in British justice and they were an assault on free speech. The judge’s characterisation of climate breakdown as a matter of opinion and belief is completely nonsensical and demonstrates extraordinary ignorance. Similarly to suggest that the climate emergency is irrelevant in relation to whether the defendants had a reasonable case for action is crass stupidity.” 

Sir David King, the government’s former Chief Scientific Adviser, said:

“This is so disgraceful. We are all hoping that the change in UK Govt will also change the situation in our courts.”

As mentioned, this legislation is controversial. It provides for stiffer sentences for protesters who block roads. It was backed by the current Prime Minister. But it has been condemned by the United Nations human rights Commissioner as "deeply troubling" and "disproportionate".

In sentencing, Judge Christopher Hehir, told the activists: 

"The plain fact is that each of you some time ago has crossed the line from concerned campaigner to fanatic. You have appointed yourselves as sole arbiters of what should be done about climate change."

Comment: it appears to me that he is introducing his personal opinion about these campaigners. It seems to me to be biased to describe the most fanatics.

Hallam described the criminal court that he attended as a "kangaroo court".

The trial was criticised by the UN's Special Rapporteur for Environmental Defenders, Michel Forst, who described the threat of a long sentence against Daniel Shaw [one of the defendants sentenced to 4 years] as potentially unlawful. Speaking on the eve of the first day of the trial, he warned: "The imposition of such a sanction is not only appalling but may also violate the United Kingdom's obligations under international law."

The danger is that the harsh sentences will fire up the campaigners to do more. It will be a catalyst for more extreme action against climate change inertia.

The next day

The next day, in The Times, there's a long list of celebrities and well-known people who have written about the injustice of these prison sentences. In fact, more than 1100 lawyers, academics, artists and celebrities have called for an urgent meeting with the attorney general to address the injustice of the sentences given to 5 environmental activists according to a report by the Times.

It is notable that the jail terms exceed those given to Just Stop Oil activists who scaled the Queen Elizabeth II Bridge Dartford Crossing in October 2022. It is also longer than many far more serious crimes such as a police officer attempting rape as I understand it. I think you'll find that rapist in the UK get prison terms of around five years sometimes.

The Prime Minister has faced calls to intervene in this case. In addition, the UN Human Rights Commissioner described the sentences as deeply troubling and disproportionate.

The millionaire Labour donor, Dale Vince, has called for a meeting with the attorney general, Richard Hermer KC.

In their letter of 1100 signatories, they echoed the call by Dale Vince and Chris Packham. Those who signed it include Lord Williams of Oystermouth, the former Archbishop of Canterbury, Sir Geoffrey Bindman KC, one of the country's most distinguished human rights lawyers and the artist Dame Tracey Emin. Sir David King, the former chief scientific adviser to the government also signed the letter. There are many others including Toby Jones, the star of Mr Bates vs The Post Office and Danny Boyle, the director of the film Trainspotting.

The general consensus is that "With prisons a breaking point how can these sentences be seen as anything other than insanity".

Further update The Times Wednesday, August 14, 2024: the protesters who were jailed for four years and Hallam the leader, who was jailed for five years are appealing against their record sentences claiming that the terms breached international law and are longer than those handed to rioters. It has transpired that the judge refused the opportunity of the protesters to explain their motivations for taking such action. And they were barred from producing evidence of the immediate threat posed by climate change. That would seem to be a serious omission and a bias by the judge.

A petition has been started in America by an American-based campaign group which has condemned the "gagging and jailing of peaceful climate protesters in UK courts." The petition argues that the laws are repressive and they have called on PM Starmer to repeal them. It has garnered 20,000 signatures to date.

The activists are arguing that the sentences were manifestly excessive and that the judge "appears to have punished the defendants for disobeying his orders not to explain their motivations for taking such actions."

-------------

P.S. please forgive the occasional typo. These articles are written at breakneck speed using Dragon Dictate. I have to prepare them in around 20 mins.

Chris Packham appeals to Gary Lineker on Twitter to get involved in the Zouma cat kicking incident

 Here is the tweet by Chris Packham directed at Gary Lineker.

Hello @GaryLineker Chris here . You may have seen that an @premierleague footballer from @WestHam has been filmed kicking and slapping a cat . As a great ambassador for sports and sportsmen and women can I call upon you to help ensure this is dealt with appropriately . Please RT pic.twitter.com/oM8P4pNKJc

— Chris Packham (@ChrisGPackham) February 8, 2022

Note: This is an embedded tweet. Sometimes they are deleted at source which stops them working on this site. If that has happened, I apologise but I have no control over it.

It is not clear to me what he specifically wants Gary Lineker to do. My guess is that he wants Lineker to put pressure on West Ham administration to punish Zouma more and perhaps terminate his contract with West Ham if it is feasible as per the terms of Zouma's contract.

We are still waiting for the RSPCA to reach a decision on what to do: prosecute Zouma or not. They are taking far too long over this. The evidence is in the video. It is plain for all to see. I guess they need to interview Zouma and the other people in the video. But the sluggishness of their investigation indicates a lack of commitment to prosecute.

Chris Packham publicly communicating with Gary Linker on Twitter. Screenshot

They are probably scared to make a decision as the case is so high profile. It was viral news for days. The cats are still with the RSPCA as far as I am aware. They should be taken from him permanently and rehomed.

The cat he kicked was a Bengal cat I believe. We don't know what filial. If the cat is a high filial such as and F2 the incident supports the desire of Packham and others to change the licensing laws on keeping high filial wild cat hybrids so that the licensing of these exotic cats is refused by the local authorities. This would stop the ownership of high filial wild cat hybrids in the UK by the backdoor.

Packham sees wild cat hybrids as damaging the conservation of the wild cats as the breeders need servals to create F1 Savannah cats and Asiatic leopard cats to create F1 Bengal cats. It is the importation of these wild cats into the UK which damages their conservation.

Snares are still legal in the UK and they are "antiquated and cruel"

Chris Packham describes snares as "antiquated, cruel and hideous". They are still legal in the UK and the Countryside Alliance say that they are useful in wildlife conservation. Packham says that snared animals "die of starvation, they die of dehydration, they die in excruciating pain, often they break their limbs". The Countryside Alliance insists that they should stay as part of the management of the countryside in the UK.

Snares are still legal in the UK and they are "antiquated and cruel". Photo in public domain.

The Countryside Alliance, in a statement, said: "Snares benefit conservation and a range of economic activities from shooting and agriculture to forestry and eco-tourism. There is often no practical and effective replacement for snaring at crucial times of the year to protect livestock and wildlife, particularly during spring and summer. Well-designed snares, used properly, are a humane and effective form of fox control."

An Animal Aid petition supported by Downton Abbey actor Peter Egan is online presently. Mr Egan said: "The snares are just absolutely horrible and they are indiscriminate. Whether it be a fox or any animal that gets caught in it, often domestic companion animals. It's so cruel."

Mr Egan is a well-known animal advocate. And Chris Packham made the point that if a small animal is trapped in a snare they become a prey animal to a larger predator so they are killed and eaten. The important issue for pet owners is that sometimes cats and dogs get caught in them. The Head of Campaigns at Animal Aid, Jessamy Korotoga, said that many people can't believe that they are still legal.

The problem with snares is that they are indiscriminate. Any animal that wanders into them and gets caught by them is killed cruelly.

Comment: personally, I hate them and I dislike the attitude of the Countryside Alliance who blithely state that they improve wildlife conservation while ignoring the pain they cause animals. They treat foxes as pests and accept that they're going to feel pain and die of starvation. They don't find any problem in that at all. And yet foxes are wildlife like any other creature with a right to survive. The Countryside Alliance practices speciesism which means they favour certain animals over others. This I think is inherently incorrect and unfair.

Chris Packham says that snares should be banned and they are banned throughout most of Europe. It's remarkable that the UK is behind mainland Europe in this regard. We have, at the centre of government, Carrie Johnson, the wife of the Prime Minister, who is a strong animal advocate. She is behind the introduction of current animal welfare legislation with the assistance of Lord Goldsmith, a friend of hers. In other words, the UK is strengthening its animal welfare laws. Why, therefore, is the dreaded and barbaric snare being omitted from these improvements in British legislation?

Is Chris Packham a cat hater?

Dr. John Bradshaw in his book Cat Sense writes that the "British wildlife TV presenter Chris Packham, a self-confessed cat-hater, appeared on BBC radio describing cats as sly, greedy, insidious murderers and calling for them to be shot".

Chris Packham. Photo in public domain.

John Bradshaw was writing about the predation of domestic cats and wildlife and how bias can sometimes be introduced into dissertations and studies by scientists on the predation of wildlife by cats. And the bias normally leans towards denigrating the cat. Perhaps the bias is inadvertent but it comes from an inherent bias within some people including scientists, sometimes.

Chris Packham's interview with Yahoo News way back on January 30, 2013 makes it clear that he is not a cat hater and that he admires the athleticism of one of the world's top predators. He doesn't want to criticise the cat per se but he wants to criticise the people who own cats and who don't take sufficient steps to ensure that their companion animals do not prey on wildlife.

He was responding, in the interview, to an article at that time about a Nature Communications study which claimed that in America domestic and non-owned cats kill up to 3.7 billion birds and 20.7 billion mammals annually. It was claimed that cats were more dangerous to wildlife than traffic accidents, pesticides and poison all together!

Dr. Bradshaw, by the way, said that in one study about the impact of cats on wildlife in the UK and which was carried out in 1997, the questionnaire sent out to cat owners was inherently biased. That study produced an estimate of 275 million animals killed in Britain each year by pet cats. He claims that the questionnaire was designed in a way which encouraged the people who completed it to submit their results only if their cat had brought in some prey during the five months of the survey. This introduced bias. The problem is that this figure of 275 million is still widely quoted by many influential organisations such as the RSPB, the British Trust for Ornithology and the Bat Conservation Trust. What is not fact, becomes fact over time and it is the cat who becomes a victim.

The answer to the question the title is that Chris Packham is not a cat hater but he wants cats to wear collars which he believes would reduce the predation rates on birds and animals by 45%. He also claims that if pet cats were kept in at night it would reduce predation rates on birds and animals by 50%. And he also says that a problem is that "cat owners do not neuter their pets". Well, I think a lot of them do neuter their pets but there are some who don't and as usual there is a minority of cat owners who are irresponsible.

Chris Packham believes that there are too many cats in the UK. I don't think we know how many cats there are in the UK! The same applies to America and other countries. We make estimates but we don't know exact figures. In 2010 it was estimated that there would over 10 million owned cats in the UK but the Yahoo News article states that the number had shrunk to 8 million.

But we have to add the recent surge in pet ownership during the coronavirus pandemic. I have read that there has been an increase of 3.2 million companion animals in UK homes over the 16 months of social distancing. That's an extraordinary increase but once again I suspect that these are estimates that we can't truly rely on.

Obviously, reducing the number of pet cats in the UK will reduce the number of animals that they kill. That is the simple argument of Chris Packham. It's an argument which is undeniable whereas proposal such as registration of domestic cats, limiting the number of cats that somebody owns, mandatory sterilisation and curfews might not lead to a recovery in local wildlife says Dr. John Bradshaw.