A group of leading UK media organisations, lawyers and rights
groups have issued a statement in support of Greenpeace as it
fights a multimillion dollar ‘intimidation' lawsuit brought by
Shell over a peaceful protest last year.
The statement was issued by the Anti-SLAPP Coalition, a
group of 31 organisations including Amnesty International, the
Committee to Protect Journalists, Index on Censorship and the
Bureau of Investigative Journalists which campaigns against
strategic litigation against public participation SLAPP, a type
of abusive lawsuit commonly brought by wealthy corporations to
silence criticism.
The Coalition Against SLAPPs in Europe (CASE), a coalition of 118
prominent rights groups including the European Federation of
Journalists, the International Federation for Human Rights
(FIDH), and PEN International has certified Shell's lawsuit
against Greenpeace as a SLAPP.
The move comes soon after UK parliamentarians debated a new bill
designed to curb the use of SLAPPs, the SLAPP Bill, in
Parliament. While the UK government has promised to back the
bill, the Anti-SLAPP coalition has warned that it “is still not
sufficiently robust to be an effective mechanism to counter
SLAPPs”, despite amendments being made at its committee stage
reading last Thursday.
Similar legislation has also been introduced in the European
Union; last month, the Council of Europe adopted a recommendation on
countering the use of SLAPPs. Earlier this year, a lawsuit
brought by Total Energies
against Greenpeace France was dismissed by the Paris Judicial
Court.
Jessica Ní Mhainín, co-chair of the UK Anti-SLAPP,
said “Shell's legal action against Greenpeace is
taking place in a worrying context of increasing attempts by
fossil fuel companies to use the law to intimidate and silence
those campaigning for remedial action to the climate crisis.
“Effective anti-SLAPP
legislation that has the power to stop the law from
being abused must be urgently adopted in order to protect those,
like Greenpeace, who fulfil an essential watchdog function in our
democracies.”
Shell launched the lawsuit in late 2023 in response to a peaceful protest by
Greenpeace UK and Greenpeace International earlier that year, in
which activists peacefully occupied a moving oil platform to
protest against the climate change loss and damage caused by
Shell.
The first hearing in the case will take place next week. The
English Admiralty Court will hear arguments on 24 May over
Shell's objection to the inclusion of evidence pertaining to its
climate record in Greenpeace's legal defence.
Shell opposed the length of the defence submitted by Greenpeace's
legal team and specifically asked that a section outlining the
company's decades-long history of climate denial and
environmental destruction be removed. The section also highlights
Shell's failure to comply with a Dutch court ruling ordering a
45% reduction in the company's carbon emissions by 2030 relative
to 2019 levels.
Greenpeace's legal team argues that sections related to Shell's
climate record are essential to explain why its peaceful
occupation of a Shell oil platform was justified as a matter of
human rights law. Further, they argue that Shell is only able to
obtain some of the legal remedies it seeks if it has “clean
hands” (has not acted improperly), and their actions as regards
to climate change, including contributing significantly to
climate change despite knowing its harm, demonstrates improper
conduct.
Philip Evans, Campaigner at Greenpeace UK, said:
“Dozens of experts have now recognised that Shell's
multimillion dollar lawsuit against Greenpeace over a peaceful
climate protest is an attempt to stifle criticism of its
climate-wrecking business. Shell hopes making an example of
Greenpeace will silence legitimate demands for climate justice,
but we will not be intimidated into silence.
“Climate chaos is already wrecking millions of lives, from
searing heatwaves in West Africa to devastating floods across
Asia. Shell's reckless plans for massive new oil and gas projects
will only accelerate the crisis. With the government missing in
action, we won't stop campaigning until Shell and the rest of the
industry stops drilling and starts paying for the damage they are
causing around the world.”
Shell acknowledges no damage was caused to its equipment, but is
still demanding around $1 million in damages, as well as legal
costs that could rise into the millions; one of the biggest legal
threats against Greenpeace in its more than 50-year
history.
Activists were calling on the company to stop drilling for new
oil and gas, and start paying for climate damage that the oil and
gas industry is fuelling around the world. Shell's public
justification for its lawsuit appears to be safety; but
Greenpeace argues that Shell and/or its contractors materially
increased the risks of the action by, for example, engaging in
dangerous ‘weaving' in an attempt to throw off the
activists.
- ENDS -
Notes for editors:
-
The Anti-SLAPP Coalition statement is available at the
following link. A link to the
statement will be available on the Anti-SLAPP coalition
website and will go live at 00:01 on 17 May. It is available
here.
