On January 30 and 31, 2025, hundreds of environmental activists gathered for peaceful demonstrations outside the Royal Courts of Justice in London, demanding justice for 16 Just Stop Oil supporters appealing their sentences. The appeal centers on the severe punishment—totaling over 41 years—handed down for protests aimed at drawing attention to the climate crisis and advocating for the end of fossil fuel use. This unprecedented case marks one of the most significant legal battles impacting climate activists and their right to protest.
The Just Stop Oil supporters, originally sentenced during the latter half of 2024, are challenging what they describe as draconian measures taken against them for their commitment to nonviolent civil disobedience. The protests outside the court were aimed at underscoring the activists’ claims of political oppression, particularly after influential lobbying against groups like Just Stop Oil by figures such as ‘Lord Walney,’ who has ties to the oil industry.
Among the prominent protesters seen outside the court were celebrities such as Chris Packham and Hugh Fearnley-Whittingstall, who joined the demonstration to send a clear message of solidarity. Paced by law enforcement, the protest maintained its peaceful nature, with activists sitting down on roads and displaying portraits of environmental advocates labeled political prisoners around the world.
During the appeal, legal representatives for the activists, including Danny Friedman KC, argued their sentences were not only excessive but also fundamentally wrong. They presented the case to Lady Chief Justice Baroness Carr and her judicial peers, reminding the court of the historical significance of the peaceful protests by environmental activists, using precedents from previous civil rights movements.
Friedman noted, "They did what they did out of sacrifice," highlighting the underlying motivations of the Just Stop Oil activists, who contend their actions were commitments to environmental justice, rather than acts of malice. Central to the activists' legal argument is the consideration of their rights under the European Convention on Human Rights, particularly Articles 10 and 11, which protect freedom of expression and assembly.
The length of the sentences—ranging from 15 months to five years—has stirred considerable debate, not least because they reflect what Friedman described as the "highest of their kind in modern British history." Prosecutors argued these sentences were justified due to the serious risks posed by the activists’ actions, which included blocking major transport routes and vandalizing artworks as part of high-profile protests aimed at drawing public attention to their cause.
The judicial response to these actions was markedly harsh; the Crown Prosecution Service contends the sentences are appropriate, emphasizing the danger posed by such protests to public safety. According to the CPS, the actions of the activists, such as those who climbed onto gantries over the M25, led to significant traffic disruption, impacting around 700,000 vehicles over several days.
Police presence was significant at the protests, with Metropolitan officers attempting to direct activists to designated protest areas. Yet, the movement showed no signs of backing down. Just Stop Oil issued statements declaring the political motives behind their actions, asserting the reality of climate change and the unjust treatment of those who stand up against the fossil fuel industry.
Chris Packham expressed his views outside the court, declaring, "We know the UK has become one of the most difficult places to protest anywhere." His remarks captured the essence of the frustrations faced by environmental activists who argue they are being criminalized for advocating for the planet’s future. He insisted on the urgent need for meaningful action from leaders against climate change.
Beyond the courtroom, the appeal has sparked solidarity protests globally, with supporters calling for systemic changes to how governments treat environmental activists. Demonstrations have occurred across countries including Canada, Sweden, and New Zealand, aligning with Just Stop Oil’s efforts for greater awareness and action on climate issues.
The Just Stop Oil spokesperson emphasized the significance of the appeal, stating, "This case is not about whether peaceful climate defenders deserve to be punished with long prison sentences. It is about the acceptability of allowing wealthy fossil fuel executives and paid lobbyists to dictate laws and silence opposition to their destructive practices." This shows the activists believe they are on the right side of history, even as they face monumental challenges.
While the appeal hearing is due to conclude shortly, the outcome will not only affect the 16 activists but may also set legal precedents impacting the future of environmental protests across the UK. The spotlight remains firmly on the relationship between legal systems and social justice movements amid growing urgency around climate change.
With tangible outcomes starting to emerge—namely the recent ruling by Scottish courts deeming large oil and gas developments unlawful—it stands to reason many see Just Stop Oil's activism as bearing fruit. This verdict aligns with their demands and serves to bolster resolve as they prepare for more actions this April, focusing on securing commitments from governments globally to phase out fossil fuel extraction and usage.
Only time will reveal the true impact of these proceedings, but one thing is clear: Just Stop Oil aims to continue their fight against climate destruction, positioning themselves at the forefront of civil resistance as the ramifications of climate change become ever more severe.