Suffragette's great-granddaughter says climate protest sentences were 'disproportionate'
The great-granddaughter of suffragette Emmeline Pankhurst described the sentences given to several climate protesters as "heavy-handed and disproportionate".
Helen Pankhurst was speaking ahead of the Court of Appeal hearing challenges against the sentences handed down to 16 activists.
They were jailed for between five years and 15 months for their involvement in four climate protests.
Adding her support to the appeal bids, Ms Pankhurst said: "The suffragettes are looked up to because they fought tooth and nail and refused to be silenced and give up on their cause, the universal suffrage now taken for granted in all democracies.
"Environmental activists today stand in the same tradition. I have no doubt future generations around the world will thank them for their campaigns.
"The heavy-handed and disproportionate custodial sentences given in the UK to peaceful environmental activists speaking truth to power is worrying in the extreme.
"A repeal is the only just outcome here."
Environmental campaign groups Friends of the Earth (FoE) and Greenpeace UK have been allowed to intervene in the case of a group of five protesters nicknamed the " Whole Truth Five", with FoE claiming the sentences were of "unprecedented length related to peaceful protest".
The challenges are set to be heard at the Court of Appeal in London over two days.
They were jailed in July last year for agreeing to disrupt traffic by having protesters climb on to gantries over the M25 for four successive days in November 2022.
Roger Hallam, co-founder of environmental campaign groups Just Stop Oil and Extinction Rebellion, was sentenced to five years in prison.
Daniel Shaw, Louise Lancaster, Lucia Whittaker De Abreu and Cressida Gethin each received four-year jail terms.
FoE and Greenpeace UK said their submissions supporting the five would also assist others involved in linked appeals.
George Simonson, Theresa Higginson, Paul Bell, Gaie Delap and Paul Sousek were jailed for their involvement in protests on the M25, during which they climbed on to gantries over the motorway.
Simonson and Higginson were jailed for two years, Bell for 22 months, and Delap and Sousek for 20 months last August.
Larch Maxey, Chris Bennett, Samuel Johnson and Joe Howlett all received prison terms of between three years and 15 months, after occupying tunnels dug under the road leading to the Navigator Oil Terminal in Thurrock, Essex.
Phoebe Plummer and Anna Holland were jailed in September 2024 after almost "destroying" Vincent van Gogh's Sunflowers by throwing soup on its protective glass at London's National Gallery.
Plummer was sentenced to two years behind bars and Holland 20 months.
Katie de Kauwe, senior lawyer at FoE, said: "Instead of further burdening our overcrowded prison system by criminalising those trying to push the climate and nature emergencies up the political agenda out of sheer desperation, the government should be accelerating efforts to deliver fair and meaningful action on the environment."
Areeba Hamid, co-executive director of Greenpeace UK, said: "These long sentences for peaceful protest make it difficult to see modern Britain as the kind of mature, tolerant culture our parents and grandparents enjoyed."
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
ITV News
an hour ago
- ITV News
Drug dealer who caused Newcastle house blast which killed two people to have sentence reviewed
A drug dealer who caused an explosion which killed two people in Newcastle is to have his sentence reviewed. Reece Galbraith caused the blast at Violet Close in Benwell in the early hours of 16 October 2024 while making cannabis gummy sweets. He and his friend Jason 'Jay' Laws were using a Newcastle flat as a drugs lab when the explosion ripped through the building, killing both laws and seven-year-old Archie York who was sleeping in the flat above. Galbraith, of Rectory Road in Gateshead, pleaded guilty to two counts of manslaughter as well as possessing and supplying cannabis. The Attorney General's Office has confirmed that a request has been received to review Galbraith's sentence under the Unduly Lenient Sentence (ULS) scheme, adding that a decision will be made "in due course." What is the Unduly Lenient Sentence Scheme? Under the scheme, anyone - including those not involved in the case - can ask for a sentence to be reviewed. The Law Officers will then have 28 days to consider the sentence and refer it to the Court of Appeal if they agree it was unduly lenient. In this scenario, the Court of Appeal will make a final decision on whether a sentence should be increased. The blast at Violet Close destroyed six of the 12 flats in the block. It was followed by a 'fierce fire' that caused such extensive damage to the whole block that it has since been demolished. Police investigating the explosion discovered that the flat operated by Galbraith and Laws was used as a 'drugs lab' to produce cannabis concentrates, known as "shatter" or "butane honey oil," in a highly dangerous process. Galbraith suffered extensive burns and was placed in an induced coma following the blast. Bodyworn from Northumbria Police shows the moment Reece Galbraith is arrested Jailing Galbraith, the judge, Mr Justice Cotter, said: "Archie York was just a seven-year-old with a wonderful and exciting life ahead of him. "His parents have so movingly explained, their world was shattered on October 16 when their flat was blown apart and they woke up buried under the rubble, dazed, bleeding and terrified to realise their precious son had been lost." He went on to say: "Violet Close was a close-knit, multi-racial community with many families that was literally blown apart as a result of your illegal activities in their midst, regardless of the clear risks to others."
Telegraph
a day ago
- Telegraph
Our two-tier justice system is turning Lucy Connolly into a martyr
Court of Appeal judges may believe that they were right to deny early release to Lucy Connolly, the 42-year-old Northamptonshire childminder who is serving 31 months in prison for an offensive tweet about asylum seekers. But even if they maintain that her sentence was just, I think they would have been wise to let her out anyway – for a simple and pragmatic reason. Keeping her locked up is eroding public faith in the justice system. Because, almost every single day now, we read of criminals being convicted of what seem like far worse crimes than hers – and yet somehow avoiding jail. Indeed, some of them manage to avoid it more than once. In 2022, a paedophile in South Shields admitted three charges of 'making indecent images of children' (as the law calls it), as well as one charge of possessing extreme pornography (which involved bestiality). As the judge at the time noted, however, 'You identify as transgender and that has caused issues for you and anxiety for you in how you would cope with that if you were sent immediately to prison.' Well, I suppose it would, although why we're meant to worry about prison being unpleasant for paedophiles, I'm not sure. But at any rate, he wasn't sent to prison. And nor was he sent there this week, when he was hauled back to court after breaching a sexual harm prevention order. On this occasion, the judge (a different one this time) said: 'You would undoubtedly be at risk of physical or sexual assault in custody because of your presentation in a male prison.' These words are of course wonderfully kind and compassionate. But, just for a moment, let's set aside questions of 'identity', and ask: which do we think is the worse crime? Writing something horrible on the internet about asylum hotels? Or downloading images of children being sexually abused – thus boosting the market for such images, and ensuring that more children will be sexually abused in future? Now, I haven't conducted a nationwide opinion poll on the above question. But I'm fairly confident that I can guess what the result would be. And I'm equally confident that I'm not alone in remembering the name 'Lucy Connolly' every time I read about some thug or pervert sauntering off with a suspended sentence. I don't for a moment deny that what Mrs Connolly wrote was awful. Nor do I deny that she broke the law. Yet our two-tier justice system is contriving to turn her into a martyr. So, even if the powers that be have no sympathy for her, they should at least look after their own interests. Which means letting her out.
Leader Live
a day ago
- Leader Live
Wrexham councillors vow to fight Cefn Road 900 homes plan
An outline planning application has been submitted for up to 900 new homes on land off Cefn Road. It has been lodged by Harworth Group for a development named Erlas Park - located close to the Erlas Victorian Walled Garden and Wrexham Rugby Club. The proposed development site is mainly made up of open grassland and a smaller area of woodland. The proposed development site layout. (Image: Planning documents) The land had been earmarked as part of Wrexham's Local Development Plan (LDP). Last year, Cllr Marc Jones won a landmark Court of Appeal case over the controversial LDP. The Court of Appeal ruling quashed the High Court judgment of Mr Justice Eyre made in December 2023 and dismissed the controversial judicial review brought by developers seeking to force through a local plan rejected in April and June 2023 by a cross-party majority of Wrexham councillors. The Welsh Government then lost its appeal against the decision at the Supreme Court earlier this year. Cllr Andy Gallanders, representing the Rhosnesni ward, said: 'I was disappointed to learn today that a fresh application has been submitted to the authority for up to 900 dwellings off Cefn Road. Cllr Andy Gallanders (Image: Local Democracy Reporting Service) 'I urge all residents to submit comments to the consultation. The site has been on the cards with the now failed LDP and we'd hoped the developers would have heard the voices of the people of Wrexham. 'If this site is allowed to be developed on it would cause a huge disruption for residents of Rhosnesni with a decade of building works and loss of valuable green space." He added: 'This isn't a case of nimbyism but an honest look at the infrastructure we have in the area. For example, The Greyhound roundabout has been declared 'at capacity' by highways with very minor changes proposed. This is just one example but look at the GPs and schools - all struggling for a multitude of reasons. 'We need homes, of course we do, but they have to come with the infrastructure, be affordable for our residents and not at the cost of green land.' What the Erlas Park development would look like. (Image: Planning documents) Cllr Carrie Harper, whose Caia ward is adjacent to the proposed site, said: 'The majority of councillors voted against adopting the LDP precisely because of development proposals like this. This scale of development will damage Wrexham. 'There is undoubtedly no need for it, especially with over 3,000 houses locally already having planning permission and not yet built. These houses won't be affordable for the vast majority and development on this scale will put huge pressure on local services and infrastructure." Cllr Carrie Harper (Image: Newsquest) She continued: 'It's important to remember that councillors were threatened with jail for refusing to adopt the plan which included this site. Some faced a six-month police investigation by North Wales Police and other complaints against councillors are still ongoing. 'Despite everything thrown at us, we won the argument at the Court of Appeal and ultimately the Supreme Court. They backed the local democratic process and our right not to accept this plan. "This was no easy victory, we had to crowd fund to finance lawyers to take on the Welsh Government, Wrexham Council and a series of developers who were all determined to force this plan on us." MORE NEWS: Cllr Harper added: 'Following the court case, there is no planning framework to support this application, the LDP has been legally quashed. "The likely situation is that Wrexham will now revert the previous Unitary Development Plan and its policies, which set out that this development site is outside of settlement and should not be granted planning permission. "Campaigners will fight this development all the way, it's not morally or legally acceptable to try and force these developments on our city following the court case.'
