Some lawyers vow to not prosecute climate activists!

[Adokforme]

Now, that's an interesting development!

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-65067321

[nowty]

There is a catch,

They have published a "Declaration of Conscience", and face the prospect of disciplinary action.

[Adokforme]

Yes, I understand some of them have self reported themselves to the bar council.

[AE-NMidlands]

There is a catch,
They have published a "Declaration of Conscience", and face the prospect of disciplinary action.

They now face the prospect of disciplinary action for breaching professional regulations such as the so-called 'cab rank rule', which requires lawyers to take on any case within their competence.
The declaration has been organised by climate group Plan B, which said some of the lawyers had self-reported to the Bar Standards Board.
In a statement, the charity said: "This is understood to be the first time in legal history that barristers have engaged in a collective act of civil disobedience."

"self-reported to the Bar Standards Board" says to me that they are calling out their so-called professional standards board.
I think it is really good and needs applauding. If people like this - at the very heart of the establishment - are prepared to stick their heads above the parapet then maybe all is not lost!
It's a pity the politicians, busy looking for bread and circuses, can't see the bigger picture.
A

[Stinsy]

I as you all know I’m very strongly in favour of stopping burning stuff and transitioning to a FF-free future. However I’ve never been a fan of XR and other such groups. I don’t think you bring ordinary folk around to your way of thinking by throwing soup at important artworks or by sitting in the road. This too I’m not in favour of. It doesn’t matter how noble your cause, laws still apply,

[AE-NMidlands]

This too I’m not in favour of. It doesn’t matter how noble your cause, laws still apply,

but the "laws" are what politicians have put in place, whether the population like them or not - or whether they comply with international obligations or treaties. Sometimes civil disobedience is the only way to get them to wake up.
See https://www.theguardian.com/environment ... l-aberdeen

UK planning to launch watered down net zero strategy in oil capital Aberdeen
The government is planning to launch its revamped net zero strategy from the UK’s oil and gas capital, Aberdeen, in a clear signal of its intention to boost the fossil fuel industry while cutting key green measures, the Guardian has learned.
...
Green experts and campaigners were “astounded” at the rebranding of what had been widely trailed as “green day”, and by the plans to unveil it in Aberdeen, the centre of the UK’s oil and gas industry.
Tom Burke, a co-founder of the E3G thinktank, said: “This is Fawlty Towers politics – don’t mention the environment! It’s a sop to the right wing. It’s clear this is not a strategy, just an assembly of lobby interests.”

He said the UK economy would suffer. “The real problem for the UK is that the US, with the Inflation Reduction Act, and the EU have started the race for a green economy. That race has gone off and we are not in the race. Green day was supposed to be an opportunity to get back in the green race, but this is just supporting [fossil fuel] lobbies.”

Worth reading the whole article, then imagine how the relaxation of the commitments will go down with people who are concerned at the way nothing is happening in the UK. When your children ask "What did you do, Grandad?" how will we reply?

[Paul_F]

There's some relevant context here which probably needs mentioning, in the way some of the prosecutions are being handled - see https://www.theguardian.com/environment ... t-of-court

[Mart]

I as you all know I’m very strongly in favour of stopping burning stuff and transitioning to a FF-free future. However I’ve never been a fan of XR and other such groups. I don’t think you bring ordinary folk around to your way of thinking by throwing soup at important artworks or by sitting in the road. This too I’m not in favour of. It doesn’t matter how noble your cause, laws still apply,

Hiya. Just to say, that's very much where I found myself about 5yrs ago(?) when XR started to block roads in London. I agreed with their message, but felt that annoying ordinary folk might be counterproductive. This left me really torn, and worried that I was adopting an appeasement approach.

But then I had an epiphany (of sorts), watching a BBC article. The reporter asked the question, how will these people and their actions be judged in the the future, and drew parallels to the suffragette movement, which was also seen as annoying and frustrating by many (including a lot of women), but now we see the utter injustice against which they were fighting.

I'm not suggesting there's a clear right or wrong here, and I find it really hard to think straight myself on the issue, but I do think some comments at the time are relevant, since throwing some soup over the protective glass on a painting or two, did make national news, and raised awareness massively.

Do we need to act asap, yep. Do we need to insulate Britain, yep. So the cause is just. But I have no idea what the best approach is.

@AE-Midlands makes a great point that the status quo and laws on which these groups are banging their heads, are ones set by the Gov, and can be changed. I'd have more patience for the Gov had they not undone building standards, and utterly massacred the roll out of energy efficiency, back in 2015, when they also went after PV and on-shore wind.

Hope this isn't too preachy. Tough topic. Should lawyers be influenced by their own beliefs and morals, when the legal system is supposed to be blind, I don't know, but I do admire those attempting to navigate these stormy waters.

[Mr Gus]

Nicely rounded answer Mart.

Yes soup over glass & not the painting brought attention because of mostly naff non contextual reportage making people think outrage at dessicration / vandalism of a painting (which it weren't, but then not so much headline) ..getting average bloke down the pubto see through that though is not likely to happen.

Likely the floor via soups constituent components were more irksome to deal with & make good than the glass.

We have commented on dirty diesel used to tow a small yacht by XR to stage an event that was anti pollutants on the road they staged their protest, ie " if they really believed" etc etc..

Their point not spoken out enough is that unlike the soup on glass climate change cannot simply be wiped away, & we ought value our planet more than a square metre of stretched & painted cloth valued at millions, versus costly environmental outrages are committed without garnering attention as we are so hardened to it... not a 7 second soundbyte neatly packaged for rolling news.

slow flooding is astill a pain in the arse to live with because it still involves a flood (just more reaction time available if utilised) we need contextual broadcasting on this which isn't news 24, 60 seconds of news highlights or breakfast tv friendly to prolonged discussion till point properly made.

I agree they (xr) can act as stupidly as us ignoring the very issue we walk by most days, maybe if they described it as trying to rouse an unconcious victim of a car accident that needed to "fight or die" (but better) ..i'm guessing that they are as prone to being called out for use / banning of certain phrases, terminology or actions as any pr dept prior to utterance.

Its a hard call, & we can all be selfish (human nature) ..as we used to say about a testy customer moaning about something small & on the scale of things insignificant..

"meanwhile, over in africa kids are dying & this guy is all piss & vinegar over a missing cable" !? .(following a 30 min get ot out of your system "hot ear" call)
..is why we used to hit petty cash send someone to the local shop opposite & bring back 20 cans of semi chilled wife-beater to help wind down the last half hour of a vexing day with & leave smiling ...our little lives get in the way until something bigger etc etc..

[Mr Gus]

If the law was so righteous & fair to all it would not allow police use of speed-gabbling legal-ese to rid people who otherwise may not be able to afford it, defense. by having a chat anywhere other than at a police station where subsequent representation (and all its financial costings) become police / crime associated savings. (because you have given up protective rights that you supposedly understand)

So I also say good on the folk choosing to vote with conscience, we actually need more of it, like a jury are "asked"

And never choose to speak to a copper under formal or informal questioning outside of a police station, take the ride.