Greenpeace is appealing a substantial fine imposed by a Danish court, which the environmental group described as unprecedented, over its protests against Russian-trading tankers. If the appeal is unsuccessful, Greenpeace will be required to pay DKK 360 000 (around $53 000). The organization believes that this case is critically important, as it could set a precedent affecting the ability to conduct peaceful protests against the existential threat posed by the climate crisis in the future.
The case stems from actions taken by Greenpeace activists in March 2022, during which they made several attempts to block Russian oil tankers passing through Danish waters. The oil on these tankers was intended for sale on the global market, helping to fund Russia’s war against Ukraine. Greenpeace admits that during these protests, activists used kayaks, swimmers, and a small sailing ship to briefly disrupt the course of several tankers in open water.
Sune Scheller, campaign manager at Greenpeace Denmark and a participant in three of the four protest actions, has criticized the court’s decision, calling the fine disproportionate to the peaceful nature of the protest. According to Scheller, the demonstrations were nonviolent and involved minimal disruption, yet they resulted in an unusually large penalty. He argued that “it completely missed the mark” for the court to punish the group so harshly for actions that briefly diverted the course of oil tankers in protest against Russian oil.
Greenpeace’s appeal is centered not on whether maritime rules were violated, but on what constitutes a fair punishment for peaceful civil disobedience, particularly when the action targets the import of oil that is funding an illegal war. The group contends that the court did not adequately consider the principles of the European Convention on Human Rights, which protects the freedom of expression and the right to demonstrate. Scheller pointed out that the Convention requires that state interventions, including sanctions, must not only be proportional but must also meet higher standards when addressing matters of significant social relevance, such as peaceful protests against environmental and political issues.
Greenpeace further argued that the court factored in previous fines levied against the organization, which they believe contributed to the unusually large penalty in this case. The group maintains that peaceful demonstrations aimed at ending the funding of a war that is causing widespread civilian suffering in Ukraine should not be met with such harsh legal consequences, especially when they align with broader concerns about climate change and international justice.
