Six climate protesters have sentences reduced at Court of Appeal

Sixteen protesters challenged their sentences for their roles in climate demonstrations at the Court of Appeal in January.

Campaigners outside the Royal Courts of Justice in London in January (Jordan Pettitt/PA)

Six protesters jailed for their roles in various climate demonstrations, including co-founder of Just Stop Oil (JSO) and Extinction Rebellion Roger Hallam, have had their sentences reduced at the Court of Appeal.

The six were part of a group of 16 activists who challenged their sentences for their roles in four demonstrations held by JSO between August and November 2022, including climbing on gantries over the M25 and throwing soup over Vincent van Gogh’s Sunflowers.

At a hearing in January, their lawyers claimed all 16 sentences were “manifestly excessive” and failed to consider the protesters’ “conscientious motivation”.

The Crown Prosecution Service opposed the appeals, stating that they were not “wrong in law”.

Just Stop Oil campaigners outside the Court of Appeal with a banner that reads 'stop jailing truth tellers' — 16 activists challenged their sentences for their roles in four demonstrations held by JSO between August and November 2022 (Lucy North/PA)

In a judgment on Friday, the Lady Chief Justice Baroness Carr, Mr Justice Lavender and Mr Justice Griffiths ruled that six of the 16 should have their sentences reduced, while dismissing the other appeals.

As Lady Carr read out a summary of the Court of Appeal’s ruling, several campaigners in court stood and turned their backs, wearing T-shirts that read “Corruption in Court”.

Hallam, who was originally jailed for five years for agreeing to disrupt traffic by having protesters climb onto gantries over the M25 for four successive days, had his sentence reduced to one of four years.

In their 44-page ruling, Lady Carr said that “deterrence was a particularly important factor” in Hallam’s case, but that it was his first sentence of immediate custody.

She said: “We consider that the shortest term commensurate with the seriousness of the offence in the case of Mr Hallam was one of four years’ imprisonment, not five.”

Several campaigners protested outside the court building on the first day of the appeal hearing (Jordan Pettitt/PA)

Daniel Shaw, Louise Lancaster, Lucia Whittaker De Abreu, and Cressida Gethin originally received four-year jail terms for their involvement in the same protest.

Shaw and Lancaster’s sentences were reduced to three years, with the judges ruling that the prison terms should “maintain the differential” between them and Hallam.

Whittaker de Abreu and Gethin’s sentences were reduced to 30 months, after the court ruled that Whittaker de Abreu’s sentence was “manifestly excessive”.

Gethin – who was aged 20 at the time of her offence – also had her jail term lowered as her “immaturity lowered her culpability”, the judges said.

Gaie Delap, who was previously jailed for 20 months for her role in protests on the M25 during which they climbed onto gantries over the motorway, had her sentence reduced to one of 18 months.

The judges ruled that two months should be taken off her original jail term, after finding that “the fact that Ms Delap was subject to onerous bail conditions for so long was something which should have been taken into account when she was sentenced”.

Protesters outside the Royal Courts of Justice wearing T-shirts that say 'corruption in court' on them — The courts have been criticised by supporters of those who were sentenced (Lucy North/PA)

Ten others had their appeals dismissed, including George Simonson, Theresa Higginson, Paul Bell and Paul Sousek, who were imprisoned for between two years and 20 months for their involvement in protests on the M25, during which they climbed onto gantries over the motorway.

Larch Maxey, Chris Bennett, Samuel Johnson and Joe Howlett were jailed for between three years and 15 months after occupying tunnels dug under the road leading to the Navigator Oil Terminal in Thurrock, Essex, and also had their appeals dismissed.

The Court of Appeal also threw out the challenges of Phoebe Plummer and Anna Holland, who were sentenced to two years and 20 months respectively after almost “destroying” Vincent van Gogh’s Sunflowers by throwing soup on its protective glass at London’s National Gallery.

Lady Carr said: “The appellants’ conscientious motivation was a factor relevant to sentencing in each case. It would have been an error for the sentencing judge to conclude on the facts that it had no part whatsoever to play in the sentencing exercise.”

She continued: “However, conscientious motivation did not preclude a finding that any appellant’s culpability was still high.”

Responding to the ruling, lawyers for Hallam and the other protesters said that they were “considering” taking the case to the Supreme Court.

Raj Chada, head of criminal defence at Hodge Jones & Allen, said: “The small reduction in the case of Roger Hallam recognises the extraordinarily excessive sentences that continue to be given out to protesters in England.

“It is, however, extremely disappointing that many of the other sentences were upheld.

“No country in Europe gives such draconian sentences for peaceful protests, proving we are out of kilter with the rest of the civilised world.

“We are reviewing the judgment and considering an appeal to the Supreme Court.”

Environmental campaign groups Greenpeace and Friends of the Earth (FoE) intervened in the appeals, which were held over two days in London.

Following the ruling, Katie de Kauwe, senior lawyer at FoE, said: “Friends of the Earth is pleased that the Court of Appeal has reduced at least some of the climate activists’ sentences.

“Ultimately however, we believe that locking up those motivated by their genuine concern for the climate crisis is neither right or makes any sense – and at a time when our prisons are so grossly overcrowded.”