UK judge praises ‘admirable aims’ of oil protestors
The operations of groups like Extinction Rebellion, Just Stop Oil, Insulate Britain and Restore Passenger Rail are often in the news, with stories generally detailing the disruption they cause to commuters. However, a BBC story about the sentencing of seven Just Stop Oil protesters shows that a sympathetic ear can sometimes be found in the unlikeliest of quarters, in this case from District Judge Graham Wilkinson in the Wolverhampton Magistrates’ Court.
The protesters were found guilty of trespassing at an Esso fuel terminal in Birmingham last April and each given a 12-month conditional discharge and ordered to pay costs to the Crown Prosecution Service.
Judge Wilkinson’s comments are worth reading through - they make it clear that although he felt obliged to uphold the law his sympathies lay with them:
“As a judge my overriding duty is always to uphold the law without fear or favour.
This is not a court of morals, it is a court of law, if I allow my own moral compass or political beliefs to influence my decisions and ignore the law where it is convenient to me to do so then the court becomes one where the rule of law no longer applies.
If judges across the criminal justice system did the same then there would be no consistency and no respect for the law, decisions based on the personal beliefs of members of the judiciary cannot be consistent with the rule of law and the ideal that each law will apply to all equally.
Trust in the rule of law is an essential ingredient of society and it will erode swiftly if judges make politically or morally-motivated decisions that do not accord with established legal principles. Indeed I would become the self-appointed sheriff if I acted in such a way.
It is abundantly clear that you are all good people, intelligent and articulate and you have been a pleasure throughout to deal with.
It is unarguable that manmade global warming is real and that we are facing a climate crisis. That is accepted and recognised by the scientific community and most governments (including our own).
Your aims are to slow or even stop the advance of global warming and therefore to preserve the planet not just for generations to come but for existing generations.
No-one can therefore criticise your motivations and indeed each of you has spoken individually about your own personal experiences, motivations and actions. Many of your explanations for your actions were deeply emotive and I am sure all listening were moved by them, I know I was.
In simple terms you are good people with admirable aims. However, if good people with the right motivation do the wrong thing it can never make that wrong thing right, it can only ever act as substantial mitigation."