316
Outrage after Greta Thunberg arrested at London oil summit protest (leftfootforward.org)
submitted 11 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
41 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Jo Maugham, Director of the Good Law Project, posted on X: “What a brave, democratic, free speech loving, nation we have become under the so-called Conservative Party.”

The most pertinent part for me. The Tories have legalised suppression.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] [email protected] -2 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

I mean, that's part of the point of the protests. You protest, you get arrested, you bring both attention and legal scrutiny to the issue. The kid went in knowing it was very likely. If a protest issue disruptive enough to get you arrested, it isn't a protest, it's a circle jerk

Edit: Too many responses with the same basic gist to make individual replies useful.

The point I was making is that a good protest plans for arrests. It's part of the point going in. It isn't a matter of whether or not someone should be arrested or not. It's the fact that the arrest itself is a chance for both media and legal attention to the protested thing.

You want to get arrested because it means you're directly threatening the status quo. It means she was successful.

Now, whether or not her right to protest was violated by the arrest is a separate issue. But, again, that gives her and her legal team a chance to challenge that very thing. It highlights the problem in the public eye as well. Again, it makes the protest successful.

A protest where everyone protesting finishes up and goes home feeling all warm and fuzzy isn't a fucking protest, it's a party. It means nobody that matters paid any attention at all. Might as well just stay at fucking home. You don't even have to be arrested for protesting, it can be for obstructing traffic, or noise ordinances, or littering. This still gives the chance to effect change on some scale that simply is not there without disruption and arrest.

Do people really not remember the civil rights movement and how they used the combination of peaceful protest and legal activity? It's one of the most successful strategies for change in human history. It fucking worked.

So, this kid being the face of the protest is definitely on purpose, and I guarantee that the arrest was predicted, if not hoped for. I strongly suspect that it was actually a goal of the protest.

Again, a protest that doesn't disrupt isn't a protest, it's a fucking circlejerk. And nothing shows significant disruption like cops trying to break it up.

[-] [email protected] 35 points 11 months ago

You should not be arrested for protesting. This is a direct contravention of article 11 of the human rights act.

[-] [email protected] 6 points 11 months ago

Thunberg and other protestors blocked entrances at the hotel, trying to prevent delegates from entering.

I think it's that blocking that might've caused the arrest, not protesting itself. As the link says

Are there any restrictions to this right?

There are some situations where a public authority can restrict your rights to freedom of assembly and association.

This is only the case where the authority can show that its action is lawful, necessary and proportionate in order to:

protect national security or public safety

prevent disorder or crime

protect health or morals, or

protect the rights and freedoms of other people.

Probably falls under the last point

[-] [email protected] 2 points 11 months ago

It is loose and contentious. I have no doubt that Thunberg will use funds to take the UK court to the ECHR. She should have taken advice beforehand. I would be very surprised if she didn't.

[-] [email protected] 2 points 11 months ago

Pretty much everywhere that would be called civil disobedience, yes it's illegal but it shouldn't be so you take the arrest and essentially argue it's morality.

[-] [email protected] 2 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

If she was arrested for preventing entry its probably "okay". Otherwise morons would be blocking access to abortion clinics and they would not be able to be arrested/dispersed. Its complicated even from moral point of view for me. I like to protest and complain but i also would like places being accessible with the current "trend" of evangelical extremisim spilling over to here... Wuats next blocking access to libraries becsuse they have a book that talks about abortion?

[-] [email protected] 1 points 11 months ago

Well that's the way to test it out

load more comments (10 replies)
this post was submitted on 18 Oct 2023
316 points (95.9% liked)

United Kingdom

4041 readers
128 users here now

General community for news/discussion in the UK.

Less serious posts should go in [email protected] or [email protected]
More serious politics should go in [email protected].

Try not to spam the same link to multiple feddit.uk communities.
Pick the most appropriate, and put it there.

Posts should be related to UK-centric news, and should be either a link to a reputable source, or a text post on this community.

Opinion pieces are also allowed, provided they are not misleading/misrepresented/drivel, and have proper sources.

If you think "reputable news source" needs some definition, by all means start a meta thread.

Posts should be manually submitted, not by bot. Link titles should not be editorialised.

Disappointing comments will generally be left to fester in ratio, outright horrible comments will be removed.
Message the mods if you feel something really should be removed, or if a user seems to have a pattern of awful comments.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
[email protected]
[email protected]