Essay by Eric Worrall
h/t Breitbart; In my opinion Amnesty International have just blown up their credibility, by objecting to the prosecution of climate protestors who block ambulances.
PRESS RELEASE – 24 OCTOBER 2022 15:34
Amnesty comments on the verdict against the climate action on E4
The right to demonstrate is a central building block in every democratic society. Even peaceful civil disobedience, such as the climate action on the E4, is covered by the right to demonstrate. Amnesty welcomes that the Solna district court did not follow the prosecutor’s line to sentence the activists to prison. This is the only real thing: peaceful activism should never lead to people being deprived of their freedom. On the other hand, it is worrying that the court accepts the prosecutor’s argument that a short-term blockade of the E4 can constitute sabotage in the sense of the criminal code.Amnesty sees with great concern that the court rules in violation of what international law requires of Sweden. There is a lack of practice in applying the sabotage crime in this way, and from a rule of law perspective, it is worrying that Sweden’s courts are beginning to assess the exercise of freedoms and rights as serious crimes, without discussion and changes in the law, contrary to practice and UN recommendations, says Anna Johansson, Secretary General of Amnesty Sweden.
In the very essence of civil disobedience is that the person who has carried out an illegal action stands for what he has done and takes responsibility for it, also legally. This is true as long as the laws applied are reasonable and the punishment is proportionate to the illegal act. Otherwise, there is no balance between the right to demonstrate and the criminal justice system.
Peaceful civil disobedience is nothing new in Sweden, but the sabotage charge for this form of peaceful action is new. Today’s judgment in the Solna district court, as well as judgments handed down this year in the Södertörn and Stockholm district courts, indicate that practice is about to change – this without further discussion and apparently without a solid legal analysis against the background of the constitutionally protected freedom of demonstration.
This shift in the judiciary’s assessments must come to an end. Law enforcement must be based on respect for the constitutionally protected freedom of demonstration and Sweden’s obligations under international law, says Anna Johansson
Climate change is a reality that requires states to act with determination. The UN has clearly underlined that a rapid and fair climate transition is an obligation for the states under international law. Both in Sweden and in other parts of the world, activists use civil disobedience to protest against states’ lack of action to reduce carbon dioxide emissions. The UN’s special rapporteur for freedom of assembly and demonstration has drawn particular attention to the importance of the right to demonstration being particularly protected in this climate emergency that we find ourselves in anyway – which also includes civil disobedience and road blockades.
The UN’s climate panel, IPCC, in a comment on states’ reluctance to take the climate disaster seriously, expressed that “civil society is to a large extent the only reliable force to get institutions to change at the pace required”. The Court should therefore have paid much more attention to these statements and recommendations under international law and analyzed the fact that Sweden has so far not done what is required to reduce carbon dioxide emissions and thus is not living up to its obligations under international law. It is this state of emergency and the state’s inaction that the activists reacted to, which should have been taken into account by the court and influenced its assessment of the road action. The principle of treaty-conform interpretation – that is, that Swedish law must be interpreted in the light of Sweden’s international obligations – is conspicuous by its absence in the decision. Thus, in its reasoning about permissible restrictions on the right to demonstrate, the court has completely failed to refer to the international legal framework and the statements of the UN experts, which is very unfortunate and has led to incorrect conclusions, according to Amnesty.
Not understanding these manifestations for the climate in the light of the right to demonstrate leads in a potentially dangerous and anti-democratic direction where constitutional rights are at stake. We assume that the judgment will be appealed, and that the higher court takes into account Sweden’s commitments under international law and defends both the fundamental freedom of demonstration and Sweden’s obligations regarding the climate emergency in its assessment. Amnesty will closely follow this case and continue to protect the right to peacefully demonstrate and protest, says Anna Johansson
Amnesty International is an independent international organization that works to ensure that human rights apply to everyone, now and in the future. By exposing violations and creating attention and public opinion, we put pressure on governments and those in power around the world.
Source: https://www.amnesty.se/press-och-media/#/pressreleases/amnesty-kommenterar-domen-mot-klimataktionen-paa-e4-an-3213103 (Translated from Swedish using Google Translate)
I think over the years Amnesty has done a lot of good. If you attend one of their letter signing events, as I have, they show attendees plenty examples of agents of tyranny who tired of receiving sacks full of letters, and ended up releasing whichever miserable wretch they were tormenting.
But supporting people who block ambulances is just wrong.
Wake up Amnesty. Every decent person supports the right to protest, but that right to protest is a right to present your message, not a right to force your message down other people’s throats. That right to protest is not a right to imprison people with traffic blockades, so they can’t get away. And that right to protest most definitely should not protect people who sabotage care for the critically ill, or create life threatening traffic chaos which leads to deaths.
I support a person’s right to protest; but I do not tolerate them disrupting my life. And this includes everyone, not just these irrational anti-liberty eco-idiots. For instance, I supported the right of the truckers to protest in Canada, I did not support them when they blocked roads. A protest like that does not become right just because I agree with the cause.
For some reason, I can’t find a single statement from Amnesty International about the J6 protestors – those held in solitary confinement, denied medical treatment, denied bail, etc. – for “parading.”
I have supported Amnesty in the past, but, this blocking of emergency vehicles is nuts.
Comes after the condemnation of Ukraine for defending there towns and villages, while Russia was shooting tied up Civilians in the back, in the same towns and villages.
It’s sad, Amnesty International has passed it’s use by date. I will have nothing to do with them in the future.
I stopped going to letter writing meetings because I disagreed with them about whether the death penalty was justified in some cases. But I still supported them for a long time, until they went completely nuts.
Credible evidence for that please. Then perhaps credible evidence for Ukraine dong the same.
I guess bodies with bullet holes in skulls and hands tied behind backs don’t count as we don’t know who did the the tieing up and who did the shooting or when. I think the Katyn Massacre is one famous case of “It wasn’t us it was them”.
It’s a sad fact that there are always these events in every war and always commited by both/all sides.
There is no credible evidence – in one town the Ukraines shelled it as the Russians pulled out with a massive, if brief, artillery barrage. Those intact civilian bodies conveniently left lying in the open to be filmed would have been shredded by shrapnel from Ukraine shells. I’m sorry to burst your bubble but many of these events have been staged to get public opinion firmly behind Ukraine. Some others may well be true, but once you start muddying the waters with staged fake atrocities, it becomes difficult to tell which are real.
I said the same in the early days of the war when pictures of a street littered with people in body bags was released. Who puts victims in body bags and just leaves them lying in the street?
AI blew up their credibility long ago. This is nothing new.
“In the very essence of civil disobedience is that the person who has carried out an illegal action stands for what he has done and takes responsibility for it, also legally.”
They got this right. Peaceful protesting in keeping with applicable laws is certainly to be protected, but that is not civil disobedience. Protesting illegally is civil disobedience. Those who do so must be prepared to be prosecuted and pay the price for their lawbreaking.
Blocking roads and endangering others is, I am sure, illegal in most jurisdictions, and should be prosecuted under applicable statutes. If others are injured, killed or financially burdened by such lawbreaking, protestors should also be open to criminal prosecution as well as civil actions for damages.
Amnesty International (AI) is trying here to suggest that “climate emergency” somehow justifies the “protestors’” lawbreaking. It does not. It really matters not the cause. If you break the law, you must be ready to pay the price. Even AI just said so in the above quote.
Blind hypocrites.
Simple solution really. Just pass laws that any citizen can request a disruptive citizen on any thoroughfare 3 times repeatedly to move and if they don’t they can be dragged out of the way with no right of recourse for damage or injury. Includes those glued.
If you deliberately block an ambulance knowing that it is travelling to an emergency situation and if the patient dies because of the delay you caused how is that not murder? You have taken deliberate and premeditated action which resulted in the death of a person in the full knowledge that your action could cause death. They have a right to demonstrate, the public has a right and indeed a duty to charge such people with first degree murder.
The protesters are infringing the public’s freedom of movement. This is seen as a fundamental human right and is article 2 of the European Convention of Human Rights. Just Stop Oil should be prosecuted.
From the article: “Climate change is a reality that requires states to act with determination.”
Nope. There is no evidence than human-derived CO2 is causing the Earth’s climate to change.
Amnesty International is operating on a false premise, along with all the other climate alarmists in the world.
Amnesty International, instead of condemning the punishment of people who block essential services, should promote the idea that protests should be held in places that do not put the general public in jeopardy. It’s possible to protest and allow people access to the hospital at the same time. But some protestors seem to think they have to make others unhappy in order to get what they want and apparently Amnesty International is backing them up.
If you block a highway in protest, you should be put in jail. Do that a couple of times and there won’t be any people out blocking the highways.
Eric,
They haven’t had much of a reputation for a couple of decades at least. Amnesty International hasn’t had a whole lot of common sense in its entire existence.
Emergency vehicles have the right of way. personally, I think the drivers of said emergency vehicles should take the right of way, and if it means running over a few idiots, too bad. Wouldn’t take but one or two incidents for the protesters to get the idea, and to stop their nonsense.
It was just because a person died in the ambulance that they wefe lrosecuted. Otherwise nothing would have happened
I gave Amnesty up three years ago when they gave Greta a special award for her “climate activism”, its stupidity is not new.
The right to protest, to speak your mind and to freely assemble is not a free pass to inflict pain and suffering on others. Every right comes with responsibility. The useless idiots blocking roads, vandalizing valuable works of art and throwing paint around like unholy water deserve whatever punishment the courts can dish out. To date the law has been far too friendly and accommodating to these fools who would tear down modern society given sufficient leave.
People on the left have completely lost their minds.
They just want more leisure time, so they won’t have to sue for amnesty.
Wow. I first read the headline as ‘Ambulances blocking protestors’. It did sound more interesting that way.
If we’ve come to this, we should seriously consider changing the traffic laws to give an ambulance driver on a lifesaving mission the legal right to run down road-blockers. Enough is enough, and the lives of people who would block them are the lesser moral priority.
As for Amnesty International, it joined several years ago a growing list of once worthy charities that have abandoned noble missions to pursue wokism. The SPLC, ADL, and ACLU are just as bad. Someone ought to create replacements for what all four used to stand for.