The rebels who were acquitted of window smashing charges (and why health professionals should care)
While many health professionals took part in Earth Day this year, it was the events of the following day which provided a reason for hope. Six protesters from the Extinction Rebellion movement went to court for damaging the headquarters of the fossil fuel company Royal Dutch Shell. They were facing worst-case scenarios of being fined £10,000 or sent to prison for up to five years. Not exactly a relaxed Earth Day after party. However, not only did the protesters avoid maximum sentences, but after hours of deliberation, the jury found all six of them not guilty.
This verdict should surprise you. In April 2019, these six people protested outside Shell HQ in London. We are not talking about the marching-chanting-and-flag-waving kind of protest. We are talking about the blocking of entrances by gluing various body parts to doors, spraying of walls, and smashing of rotating door glass. All six rebels readily admitted that they were involved in these activities. It is hard to deny that they created the damage; and yet, they were found not guilty of causing criminal damage without a lawful excuse. By now, I hope all of you are raising one or two eyebrows.
Photo credit Helena Smith
How could they get away with this? We will never know on what grounds the jury reached their conclusion. Yet the rebels’ main defence was very simple. In the words of Senan Clifford, one of the six:
“I believe if I don’t do whatever I can to protect our Earth, to protect life on this Earth, to stop the death and injury that is and will be happening, I’m committing a crime, a really serious crime, and I’m willing to break a window, to paint a message on a wall, I’m willing to break the glass on that emergency button, even if some say that’s a crime. Because this is a much bigger crime and I’m trying to stop that crime, I’m trying to protect life in the only way I feel I can.”
When a company commits horrific crimes against humanity, for decades, without facing any penalty worth mentioning, then it is not only justifiable but conscientious to commit a comparably minor crime that draws attention to these evil deeds. And the fact that Shell has been involving itself in evil is beyond any doubt at this stage. Internal documents show that Shell knew as early as 1981 that the climate was warming because of carbon emissions caused by their products. They spent millions on misinformation campaigns and lobbying efforts that, amongst countless other actions, prevented the US from signing the Kyoto Protocol in 1997. Shell has been accused of playing a part in killing the critics of their oil projects in Nigeria – an allegation that was never investigated in court as Shell arranged a $15.5 million settlement with the plaintiffs instead. Not to mention the minor issue that Shell continues to exploit and burn fossil fuel reserves around the world, thereby making it less and less likely that we will avert nightmarish climate scenarios with every day that passes by.
None of this is news, and yet no one has ever been found guilty of any of these crimes. It is worth thinking about this for a second. We sometimes seem to take it for granted that “big corporates” get away with doing nasty stuff. However, there are individuals making decisions in the name of their companies – individuals who were paid noteworthy sums of money to read the internal documents informing them about climate change, to commission lobbyists, and to manage the Niger Delta project. So why, after all these years, is it not those individuals who are judged by a jury for knowingly jeopardising the lives of millions? Why is it that a small group of activists must fear for their liberty after drawing attention to these misdeeds? It is in the light of this paradox that the jury’s decision to acquit the protesters suddenly appears pretty common sense.
Photo credit Helena Smith
This is a story of hope because it reflects a unity rarely seen in a time when the word “polarisation” gets thrown around like statues in Bristol. More British people than ever before agree that climate change exists and that it is a crisis requiring more action. If this was not the case, the protesters may well have faced a different verdict.
The question, then, is why this widely held agreement is not more visible in the health professional community. I will spare you an essay on the links between climate change and health, as they have been well documented elsewhere (Link 1 2 3 4 5). Think of the health issue close to your heart and ask yourself whether it will be affected by rapid increases in flooding, heatwaves, crop failures, mass migration and conflict. Exactly. Climate change is not just another health issue – it is the mother of all issues. As climate change worsens, so does pretty much every aspect of public health, most likely within our lifetime. We know this. We read about it, we talk, we write… but we do not act. Unfortunately, we have wasted decades waiting for the climate issue to be dealt with by others and global temperatures are still rising.
The acquitted XR rebels are a teacher, a carer, a bushcraft instructor, a repair worker, a landscape consultant, and a builder. None of these individuals were born with an insatiable fascination for greenhouse gases and solar panels. But when they learnt that companies like Shell had been sacrificing the health and happiness of past, present, and future communities for profit, they realised that it was not good enough to leave action on this inconceivable injustice to others. Will health professionals follow their lead?
You don’t have to smash glass doors to join Extinction Rebellion – any skill is welcome and needed! Find out more by clicking here or by contacting me.
Disclaimer: The Keppel Health Review publishes pieces on behalf of Contributors. The views represented are those of the Contributor and do not represent the views of the Keppel Health Review. Please see our Coverage Statement and Code of Conduct.
