A majority of the public thinks the four- and five-year sentences handed out to Just Stop Oil activists were too harsh, researchers have found, while academics warn harsh punishments will do little to deter further protests.
A judge sentenced four activists to four years in prison for conspiracy to cause a public nuisance after planning four days of disruption to the M25. Co-founder Roger Hallam received a five-year sentence, with the terms believed to be the harshest ever handed out to peaceful protesters.
- Read prison letters of Just Stop Oil activists jailed for QE2 bridge protest: ‘UK cannot imprison its way out of climate crisis’
- Scotland’s national poet Kathleen Jamie on why book festivals are wrong target for climate activism
In a poll conducted by Social Change Lab, a think-tank researching the effectiveness of protest movements, 61% of respondents said they believed the sentences were too harsh. Just 12% felt the sentences were too lenient while 27% thought they were proportionate.
“We were really struck by the contradiction between the opinions of some in the media that people engaging in disruptive protests should be harshly punished, and what the public have told us,” said Markus Ostarek, director of research of Social Change Lab.
“This poll indicates a striking consensus among the British public that the sentences delivered to the Just Stop Oil campaigners do not align with the perceived gravity of their actions. This raises important questions about the proportionality of sentencing in cases of peaceful protest.”
Gina Romero, the UN’s special rapporteur on the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association, called the sentences disproportionate.