Why is What Greenpeace does NOT Hooliganism?

[lljkk]

Have wondered this for decades, especially with regard to at sea activism.

Why the seemingly huge legal tolerance for their interference with legal activities. I can understand the argument "It's not in the public interest to prosecute"; but it's still vandalism, no? Trespass at least, surely?

They do get arrested quite frequently.

Some British activists have recently spent a couple of months in prison in Russia charged with piracy after a sea activism protest.

The women who climbed The Shard were arrested.

I know people in the 90s who climbed power stations and were charged and convicted in court.

I think because quite often their interference with legal activities is also legal. But yes they do get arrested a lot. Also, hooliganism is mindless, non violent direct action has a purpose.

Is it legal, though? How can it be legal to trespass and interfere? Can I just blockade the road if I don't like the lorries using it?

I wonder if hooliganism is "mindless" under Russian law. It seems like they sometimes make the conditions dangerous for the target boats to work in. Is endangering others not a crime in itself at sea...
Or would trespass be a better crime to charge the Russian Greenpeacers with?

Family member was involved in trial of protesters who staged sit-ins at abortion clinics. Most protesters went to court because they refused to plead guilty of trespassing. They were found guilty after trial, anyway. They were still guilty, iyswim, even if it was non-violent direct action, still guilty of something.

Interesting article here:

www.campaigncentral.org.uk/know-how/direct-action-and-the-law

OF course morally right, and legally right aren't necessarily the same :)

www.campaigncentral.org.uk/know-how/direct-action-and-the-law