[ad_1]
Unlike the sole judge, the Cantonal Court of Vaud does not recognize a “justifying state of exception” that would have legitimized the act of civil disobedience.
They were not allowed into the courtroom due to Covid-19 regulations, so supporters of the accused climate activists gathered in front of the building.
The judge’s verdict was awaited with great tension, and it turned out as almost all observers suspected beforehand: shortly after 10 a.m., the Vaud Cantonal Court ordered the twelve climate activists to protest at a Credit Suisse (CS) branch in 2018 He had played tennis, convicted of trespassing and violation of the Fines Law Ordinance. It therefore annuls the acquittal of the Lausanne District Court in January, which caused waves far beyond the country’s borders.
The first instance established that the activists had transferred their action. At that time, however, the sole judge recognized a “justifying emergency” that legitimized civil disobedience. Action was the only effective way to get the big bank to react: it was “necessary and appropriate.”
Switzerland is not inactive
This line of reasoning has now been contradicted by the court of appeal, which, due to the provisions of Covid-19, was met with partial exclusion from the public. It should be noted that climate change and associated effects pose an immediate threat to humanity, said the president of the court, Christophe Maillard. However, Switzerland is by no means inactive in the fight against it and has taken concrete steps to significantly reduce its greenhouse gas emissions. Maillard also mentioned the COtwo-Act that Parliament only approved this Wednesday.
Furthermore, the means used by the activists were not adequate to avoid the danger. Squatting does not have a direct impact on global warming. That the action has attracted public attention does not change that. Especially in Switzerland, which is directly democratic, there are a multitude of legal possibilities to draw attention to one’s own concerns. “The defendants could have achieved their goal by appearing more in the media, in public debates or in the political arena,” Maillard said.
In summary: the court determined that the conditions to be able to speak of a “justifying emergency” had not been met. The three cantonal judges disagreed on one point. However, this referred to the less relevant violation of the Fines Law Ordinance.
No exemption from punishment
According to previous jurisprudence, the court was expected to convict the activists. But would they be punished for trespassing? Criminal law recognizes the possibility of exemption from punishment in cases where the guilt and consequences of the crime are slight. The Cantonal Court of Vaud did not want to know anything about it. The squatting had a noticeable impact on the bank’s normal operations, which even had to close for a quarter of an hour. It is also important that most of the activists resisted the orders of the police.
The court sentenced 10 of the 12 activists to fines of 20 daily rates of CHF 20 each. The daily fee is set relatively low because almost all of the defendants continue to study and have little income. Only the two women who did not oppose the police benefit from the reduced sentences: they have to pay 10 daily fees of CHF 20 each. The condemned must pay the legal costs.
“Stinking fingers to youth leadership”
Many supporters of the activists have gathered in front of the Renens courthouse. They held placards with dramatic newspaper headlines about climate change. When the twelve climate activists and their volunteer attorneys left the building, they received applause. Paul Castelain, one of those convicted, spoke of a “shocking verdict”. The court did not have the courage to “develop the law” in view of the danger and urgency of the climate crisis. This “repressive interpretation of the law” corresponds to an unreal worldview and is nothing more than a “finger in the direction of youth.”
Attorney General Eric Cottier was completely different: He was “completely satisfied” with the judge’s verdict. The fact that the fines imposed were slightly lower than those dictated by the Prosecutor’s Office in the sanction order is secondary. “It is important that the fundamental principles of the rule of law are restored,” Cottier said. The ruling is not a setback for climate youth, but simply a reminder that they must carry out their actions within applicable law.
Flirtation with Roger Federer
The case that the court had to deal with was dated November 22, 2018. Two dozen members of the Lausanne Action Climat movement went to a Credit Suisse branch in central Lausanne, unpacked tennis rackets, opened a net and simulated a . Lot. After several ultimatums expired, the police had to withdraw them individually after a good hour. With the campaign, the activists wanted to protest against the investment policy of CS, which is creating a positive image of itself with the advertising medium Roger Federer, while investing money in projects and companies that damage the climate. The big bank vehemently contradicts this representation.
The last word has yet to be said in this legal dispute. The activists’ lawyers announced before the trial that they would refer the sentence to the Federal Supreme Court and, if necessary, to the European Court of Human Rights. They confirmed this intention after the trial.
Credit Suisse defends itself
fum. · The reaction of the second largest bank in Switzerland is brief: take note of the judgment of the cantonal court, but do not comment on it, reports the media department. Even before the appointment process, the CS declared that the description of the climate activists was incorrect. “Credit Suisse is committed to protecting the climate and achieving the goals of the Paris Climate Agreement,” the media office writes. Its own guidelines have been “continually reinforced” over the past few years and concrete action has been taken. For example, CS no longer invests in coal mines or new coal-fired power plants, and in August this year created a role for sustainability in management. Over the next ten years, the plan is to provide at least 300 billion Swiss francs in sustainable financing.
