Protesters doth protest too much

Heathrow owners win climate-camp injunction

Posted by Katharine Wroth at 7:21 AM on 06 Aug 2007

Read more about: England | environmental movement | litigation

Last week in Daily Grist, we reported that BAA, the company that owns Heathrow Airport, had requested an injunction against protesters planning a weeklong Camp for Climate Action in mid-August. The original request was so badly worded that it sounded like 5 million people would be kept away from the airport, but a judge granted a narrower version today.

The judge, while citing the risk that "a terrorist group may use the disruption caused by the protesters to perpetrate a terrorist act," said peaceful protest is AOK, and organizers of the climate camp say it will go on as planned. So did BAA "win," as all the headlines are screaming? Or did it just waste a bunch of time?

For story: Protesters doth protest too much
1 Comment | Post a Comment

Not All The Headlines

Today The (London) Times reported "Heathrow is defeated in its attempt to ban environmental campaigners" and if you read the details of the injunction, and the news on the Climate Camp web site, you will see that the injunction now in place only applies to 3 people out of the many thousands who will be attending.

Furthermore, the injunction only slightly extends existing English trespass laws, and retains the right to protest. I sometimes feel lucky to be British, with a far more liberal right to protest than my colleagues in the USA and even more draconianly controlled authorities.

The real issue here, though, is that the law in all "civilized" nations is heavily skewed in favour of land ownership, property and wealth. A rapist will spend - on average - far less time in jail (if at all) than a tax evader or corporate embezzler. A tree-sitter does not have the right to tree-sit if the ancient forest she is protecting is being destroyed by a logging company acting within the law.

We need to recognised this appalling imbalance in the law and make others aware of it. The law does not protect the planet, it has to be changed, or ignored.

Keith Farnish
www.theearthblog.org

Keith Farnish www.theearthblog.org

by farnishk at 5:23 AM on 07 Aug 2007

ADVERTISING POLICY

You are not logged in. Thus, you cannot post a comment. If you have an account, log in. If you don't have an account, well, by all means go make one! Meet you back here in five.