By Celsias
Posted on Sept. 23, 2012. Listed in:
Royal Dutch Shell is suing Greenpeace to try to have Greenpeace banned from holding any protest within 500 meters (1,640 feet) of any Shell property, or face a €1 million fine.
Both are based in Holland. Shell is based at the Hague in the Netherlands and Greenpeace International is based in Amsterdam. The suit is in the Amsterdam District Court .
Shell is getting testy and says it wants to protect its $4.5 billion investment in the Arctic off the coast of the Arctic.
Shell claims that Greenpeace's actions and demonstrations “have gone well beyond the limits of acceptable protest.”
“Shell continues to respect the legitimate right of people to peacefully protest against the activities we undertake to ensure the world’s energy needs are met,” the statement said.
Greenpeace has said the move is “legal sledgehammer to stifle public discourse.”Drilling in the Arctic , they argue is inherently risky and Shell has not taken sufficient action to mitigate that risk .
There have been a number of demonstrations in this area but the one that has sparked this action
from Shell is a Dutch demonstration on September 14 in which 70 Shell gas stations in the Netherlands were blocked for several hours.The dmonstrators actually ( in an act of poetic justice ) clamped the gas handles with bike locks.
So Shell gets crabby when you affect their ability to drill anywhere and when you affect their ability to sell their product.
No, in case you were wondering, for Shell it doesn't work the other way. So if you are trying to protect the climate, countries even that are disappearing with climate change, wildlife and the future weather patterns then Shell apparently owes you nor anyone else a duty of care. At least that's what they seem to be saying.
Shell goes on in its statement of complaint to have a go at all other groups as well
“Because Greenpeace International doesn’t operate alone, but is the spider in the web of national and local organizations, our request includes that Greenpeace inform its satellite organizations that it no longer supports protests that are solely directed at causing Shell economic damage or that bring human lives and the environment in danger,” Shell’s complaint said.
Greenpeace campaigner Ben Ayliffe said Shell was “in no position to accuse others of being reckless or unsafe,” given the difficulties the company may face if an offshore spill occurs in the Artic amid bad weather.
In its legal complaint, Shell requested “that Greenpeace inform its satellite organizations that it no longer supports protests that are solely directed at causing Shell economic damage or that bring human lives and the environment in danger,” the Associated Press reported. Shell declined to comment on the details of the filing.
On top of seeking the fine for staging a protest too close to Shell properties, activists could face an added fine of roughly $130,000 for every added day that “any activities, at least illegal activities,” continue, according to a summary of Shell demands provided by Greenpeace. Shell declined to comment.
The Dutch court is expected to hand down its verdict in two weeks; until that time, the two parties have agreed that Greenpeace “will not carry out disruptive activity at petrol stations that could prevent or disturb customers from fueling their vehicles.” Shell successfully won a similar order from a U.S. federal court earlier this year ordering Greenpeace to stay away from drilling vessels in Alaska.
