The recent protest conducted by the Restore Passenger Rail climate protest group in which a Wellington car dealership was vandalized with red paint is not just a local occurrence; it’s part of a global trend. Across the world, there have been various forms of climate protests, including activists targeting airline executives with cream pies, protesters attaching themselves to iconic artworks in famous galleries, school students boycotting classes to demand climate justice, and disruptions of airport runways. In New Zealand, roads and highways have also been blocked as part of these demonstrations.
These protests are likely to persist and intensify as the climate crisis worsens, and frustration grows due to what many perceive as insufficient government action. Groups like Extinction Rebellion see “non-violent direct action and civil disobedience” as not only justifiable but crucial in the face of what they consider an urgent existential threat.
However, every climate action has triggered a political and legal reaction. In various countries, including Europe and Australia, governments have implemented crackdowns and introduced new laws to address these protests. In the UK, for example, laws have been drafted to create specific offenses related to obstructing major transport works, interfering with critical national infrastructure, and causing serious disruption through activities like tunneling.
Earlier this year, a New Zealand citizen living in the UK received a three-year prison sentence for participating in a protest that shut down a busy road in London, which some viewed as a draconian punishment.
As the stakes continue to rise, it’s crucial for governments and legal systems to adapt without inadvertently escalating a “climate protest arms race” that might lead to increasingly unreasonable impacts on the general public.
In New Zealand, there is a discernible trend towards authorities seeking harsher penalties for climate protesters. The traditional penalty for obstructing a public road without consent is a fine of up to NZ$1,000. Now, potential charges of criminal nuisance are being added, and police have warned that protesters could face up to 14 years in jail for endangering transport, which is longer than the maximum sentence proposed for certain serious crimes like ram-raiding.
Nevertheless, protest is a vital aspect of free and democratic societies and has historically played a crucial role in driving societal change. While there may not be a specific legal right to protest, it is considered a manifestation of rights to freedom of movement, association, and peaceful assembly in most liberal societies. These rights are globally protected by the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights and related human rights treaties. In New Zealand, the Bill of Rights Act 1990 guarantees these rights.
However, the right to protest is not absolute and can be subject to reasonable legal limitations in a free and democratic society. Not all forms of protest may be permissible, especially those that involve disorderly acts or pose risks to public safety. Tolerance for protest and some level of inconvenience should be expected in liberal democracies, but intentional and serious disruptions to everyday life may be deemed illegal if done unreasonably.
The challenge lies in determining what constitutes reasonable protest, which involves assessing the scale and impact of the inconvenience caused and balancing it against the rights and freedoms of others affected.
Climate protests exist at the intersection of morality and legality. While reducing carbon emissions often involves targeting roads, highways, and fossil fuel-powered vehicles through blockades and choke-points, authorities have historically been tasked with ensuring these vital routes remain open for citizens.
The challenge is finding a balance between two conflicting worldviews. It is wrong to suppress legitimate dissent, but governments and authorities also need to create space for and potentially facilitate protest movements aimed at altering fundamental behaviors.
One possible response could involve designating specific areas for protests, including on roads, to allow these messages to be heard and seen. These designated areas would need to be authorized and conducted in ways that do not unreasonably hinder the rights of other citizens.
However, such measures might not satisfy the more radical factions of the protest movement, which see direct and disruptive actions as the only effective method. There may be no simple solution, but it is essential for New Zealand’s government to review existing legal frameworks to ensure they are appropriate for the current circumstances. While everyone is equal before the law, penalties should not be disproportionate. Law and policy must recognize the climate crisis as a significant challenge requiring substantial effort and change, without becoming tools for repressing social movements seeking account ability from those in power.