"The District Court considers that climate change is acute and that there is an immediate danger to life, health, and property".
The verdict is a so-called lay judge verdict, where the court's chairman and a lay judge wanted to convict. The man's lawyer, Linus Gardell, calls the verdict historic.
This is the first verdict that addresses the question of the acute climate crisis where the District Court fully acquits a person with reference to the provisions on self-defense, he says.
Another climate activist was previously convicted of the same crime in the District Court but avoided punishment with reference to having acted to protect the climate, so-called penalty waiver. However, that decision was overturned by the Court of Appeal, which convicted the activist to pay a fine.
featured
In the Netherlands, since 2023, there have been quite a lot of road blockades by XR (with hundreds to thousands of demonstrators) with no such penalties at all. From what I've read the activists in the UK were (rightfully so) determined to have their say in the court room while the judge sounded like a climate crisis denial person and got impatient. If I were a lawyer I would have made an attempt to get this judge dismissed on the case for not being objective and before they were ready for their verdict.