7 hours ago
Three Just Stop Oil protesters have been cleared over a protest at Stonehenge during which orange powder was sprayed on to the prehistoric circle.
Rajan Naidu, 74, Niamh Lynch, 23, and Luke Watson, 36, targeted Stonehenge the day before last year’s summer solstice.
JSO said the action brought more attention from around the globe than any other of its protests. The three argued their peaceful protest was justified because of the focus on the climate emergency that flowed from it.
Salisbury crown court heard the protesters used “colour blasters” to spray the stones in Wiltshire. It cost £620 to remove the powder and there was no lasting damage.
The three faced charges including causing a public nuisance, which has a maximum jail of 10 years. The law has been widely criticised as an attack on the right to protest.
During his summing up, Judge Dugdale said that to find the three guilty, the jury would have had to be satisfied a conviction would be a proportionate interference in their rights to freedom of expression and protest.
He said: “If individuals disagree with what our government is doing on certain matters they are entitled to protest.
“For any of the defendants to be convicted, you have to be sure not just that they had committed the elements of the offence but you also have to be sure that a conviction … would be a proportionate interference with their human rights to express their opinions and protest against government inaction.”
The prosecution argued the protest did not need to take place at Stonehenge, which it said had no connection with the climate emergency.
Naidu, who describes himself as a campaigner for human rights, social justice and peace; Lynch, a University of Exeter ecology student; and Watson, a carpenter, denied damaging an ancient protected monument and causing a public nuisance.
Other protesters and lawyers have been watching the case keenly, especially the use of the public nuisance legislation.
Speaking outside court, Naidu said: “It’s highly repressive legislation, it’s retrogressive, it’s going back to the times of the suffragettes when women were being treated appallingly, having their human rights violated. We’re going back to those times.”
All three said they were proud of the action and one another. Naidu said: “I feel privileged to be with people like this. They are people of great integrity. I’m very proud to be part of this and blessed.”
Thanking the jury, the judge said it had been an important case, with issues about freedom of expression and the right to protest at the centre of it.
He said: “This was an important decision for the issues about the right to protest, the right to freedom of speech compared to the right of a world heritage site to sit unmolested by members of the public. It’s a difficult one to gauge.”
The judge said for centuries juries had been asked to decide on allegations of serious crime in their communities. “It’s people from the community chosen at random who should decide if someone has committed that offence or not. There’s 12 of you, each of you brings something completely different to the decision-making process so we have a good cross-section of society.”
The jury said they wanted to flag up the “brave and selfless” actions of a worker at the site, Man Chu Zah, who tried to intervene in the protest. The judge said he would recommend the worker for a high sheriff’s award.
Francesca Cociani, criminal defence lawyer at Hodge Jones & Allen who represented the protesters, said: “My clients are incredibly relieved by today’s verdict that exonerated them of any wrongdoing.
“The public nuisance charge in this case, which argued their protest could have caused serious distress, annoyance or inconvenience to the public, was wholly inadequate and in our view, should never have been bought and amounted to an affront to their right to protest.
“It is a relief that the jury has decided to uphold the right to peaceful protest. It is a right that has long been, and should remain, an essential pillar of our democratic society but we are seeing time and time again that this right is being eroded.”
