Five Just Stop Oil activists jailed over protest that caused delays on M25

For free real time breaking news alerts sent straight to your inbox sign up to our breaking news emails

Sign up to our free breaking news emails

Please enter a valid email address

Please enter a valid email address

SIGN UP

I would like to be emailed about offers, events and updates from The Independent. Read our privacy policy

A judge has jailed five Just Stop Oil activists for their roles in a protest which saw campaigners climb gantries on the M25, causing widespread traffic disruption.

Judge Shane Collery KC said “many people suffered hours of delay” and told the defendants: “Your actions were disproportionate to your aims.”

He said their purpose, on November 9 2022, was to “create mass disruption so Just Stop Oil would benefit from the media interest it would create”.

The judge noted that an accident happened near one gantry and it was “fortunate more accidents did not occur”.

He told Basildon Crown Court on Thursday that the defendants were all either retired, students or recent graduates at the time.

“It’s easy to be blase and dismissive when it’s not your life that’s being disrupted,” he said.

He described the protest as “perhaps a curious way of seeking to influence the public opinion”.

He said the protesters “considered you knew better than everyone else”, and suggested an element may have been “the day out and perhaps the excitement of a day’s action”.

He accepted the defendants were not the organisers of the protest but said they were “willing volunteers”.

The judge said the court “accepts a conscientious motive may be a relevant consideration” but that “your actions were disproportionate to your aims”.

He told the defendants: “You are all intelligent people and more than capable of working out why you’re in this position and what you need to do to avoid it.”

All the defendants pleaded guilty at an earlier hearing to causing a public nuisance, as they were about to stand trial.

The judge jailed George Simonson, 24, of Leeds, and 26-year-old Theresa Higginson of Biggleswade, Bedfordshire, for two years.

Simonsen smiled and waved to the public gallery as he was led to the cells, while Higginson shouted – referring to details heard earlier in the proceedings – that her “vegan diet did not make me ill”.

Paul Bell, 24, of Exeter, was jailed for one year and 10 months, and he waved and blew kisses as he was led to the cells.

Gaie Delap, 77, of Bristol, and Paul Sousek, 73, of Bude in Cornwall were jailed for one year and eight months.

The judge told Delap: “Age, I regret, has not brought wisdom.”

Sousek said “thank you very much” after he was jailed, and tried to read from a document before he was bundled towards the cells by a security officer.

A sixth defendant, Daniel Johnson, 25, of Perth and Kinross in Scotland, was spared jail.

The judge told him: “I’m prepared to accept the remorse expressed as genuine.”

He described Johnson as the “only defendant with a realistic prospect of rehabilitation”.

He sentenced Johnson to 21 months in prison suspended for 24 months, and ordered that he complete 200 hours of unpaid work and pay £750 in costs.

The judge ordered that the activists’ climbing equipment, locks and banners be confiscated.

There had been gasps at the start of the judge’s sentencing when he told the six defendants: “In all but the case of Daniel Johnson those (sentences) will be for immediate terms of imprisonment.”

The judge ordered that a second count of causing a public nuisance against all six should lie on the file.

Francesca Cociani, from Hodge Jones & Allen – who represents Delap, Bell, Johnson, and Higginson, said afterwards: “Today’s decision to imprison peaceful protesters is a grave injustice and does not align with the UK’s professed values.

“Peaceful protest is a fundamental right and a vital tool for enacting positive societal change.

“Increasingly lengthy prison terms for these types of individuals were previously unseen and it sends a disturbing message in our liberal democracy.

“We are exploring our options, including the possibility of an appeal, to challenge this decision and to defend the fundamental right to peaceful protest.”