The following is based on a communication sent by the UN Special Rapporteur on Human Rights Defenders and other UN experts to the Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland on 8 May 2024. The communication remained confidential for 60 days before being made public, giving the Government time to reply. The Government replied on 4 July 2024.
At the time of publication, Stephen Gingell is still on bail pending the results of his appeal.
This is a shorter version of the original communication.
BACKGROUND
Topic: the sentencing of Mr. Stephen Gingell, for his participation in a slow march protest in London on 13 November 2023.
Stephen Gingell is a businessman and environmental human rights defender who has been working on the issue of climate change and fossil fuels, including by participating in initiatives and peaceful protests related to the climate emergency.
Previous communications had been sent on the arrest and sentencing of other ‘Just Stop Oil’ protesters (GBR 16/2023) on 15 August 2023, as well as on the implications of the adoption of the Public Order Act of 2023 in OL GBR 16/2022, on 22 December 2022.
ALLEGATIONS
Mr. Stephen Gingell was arrested on 13 November 2023 in London for slow marching peacefully. Along with about 100 other protesters, he spent approximately 30 minutes on a road in North London.
The slow march was organized by ‘Just Stop Oil’, as part of their campaign demanding that the government stop all new oil, gas and coal projects in the United Kingdom.
The slow march on 13 November 2023 involved about 100 activists. At 8.30 a.m. the protesters started marching at Hendon Way in North London. Metropolitan Police were reportedly immediately on the scene, with over seven vans of officers. The police allegedly began arresting ‘Just Stop Oil’ supporters as soon as they began marching for allegedly breaching section 7 of the Public Order Act 2023.
Mr. Gingell pleaded guilty in November 2023 at Wimbledon Magistrates Court, London, and was transferred to Manchester Magistrates court for sentencing.
On 14 December 2023, the Manchester Magistrates Court sentenced Mr. Gingell to six months in prison for marching in the road after he pleaded guilty to breaching section 7 of the Public Order Act.
Section 7 of the Public Order Act 2023 bans any act that prevents newspaper printing presses, power plants, oil and gas extraction or distribution sites, harbours, airports, railways or roads “from being used or operated to any extent”, with a potential penalty of 12 months in jail.
CONCERNS
In the communication, we express our concerns regarding the arrest and sentencing of Mr. Stephen Gingell, for his peaceful activities in defence of environmental human rights.
We note that in reply to a previous communication (GBR 16/2021) the Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland stated that ‘the Government introduced the Public Order Act 2023 (the Act), alongside other legislation, to improve the police’s ability to manage seriously disruptive protests and take a proactive approach to prevent such disruption happening in the first place. This will ensure the police can better balance the rights of protesters against the rights of others to go about their daily business’.
We maintain our previously expressed concern however that the effect of the application of the Public Order Act, in particular with regard to peaceful protest action, such as the slow marches organized by ‘Just Stop Oil’ are in violation of the right to peaceful assembly, and that the proportionality assessments alleged to have been carried out were not accurate.
The slow march in North London in November 2023 had barely begun when police officers arrested a group of participants. We are concerned that a peaceful protest lasting less than 30 minutes and about 100 people is considered as ‘serious disruption’ under the provisions of the Public Order Act, which appear to be contrary to the standards under article 21 of the ICCPR and the General Comment No 37.
We stress that protests, which aim to express dissent and to draw attention to a particular issue, are by their nature often disruptive. The fact that they cause disruption or involve civil disobedience does not mean that they are not peaceful. As the UN Human Rights Committee has made clear, States have a duty to facilitate the right to protest, and private entities and broader society may be expected to accept some level of disruption as a result of the exercise of this right. Even when the stated intent of a peaceful protest is to cause the disruption of vehicular or pedestrian movement, or economic activities, this does not necessarily call into question the protection such assemblies should enjoy (General Comment No 37, para. 7).
We are gravely concerned about the potential chilling effect that the severity and number of the sentences against environmental human rights defenders under the Public Order Bill could have on civil society and the work of activists and human rights defenders, expressing concerns about the triple planetary crises and, in particular, the impacts of climate change on human rights and on future generations.
