Deanna
"Violet" Coco, who demanded more action on climate change, shut down
one lane of rush-hour traffic on the Sydney Harbour Bridge for 28 minutes in
April.
She would receive a 15-month prison term for those 28 minutes.
An Australian court sentenced Coco to jail last week after she admitted to breaking traffic regulations, igniting a flare, and disregarding police commands to move on, in a decision that has received outrage from across the world.
According
to Magistrate Allison Hawkins, the environmental activist's "selfish
emotional activities" caused a "entire city to suffer." When you
pull such infantile tricks, you harm your cause.
In eight months, Coco will be eligible for release, but her attorney intends to appeal the verdict because he believes it is "extraordinarily severe" and "baseless."
There are five lanes on that bridge, and Mark Davis told the BBC that she only stopped one for a brief period of time. He noted that her co-accused escaped from prison.
"This
is practically unprecedented."
In
what "way of life"?
The case's conclusion instantly caused a commotion. Small demonstrations were conducted all around Australia, and politicians and human rights organisations spoke out against the sentencing.
The case, according to Human Rights Watch researcher Sophie McNeill, sends a dreadful message to everyone in the world.
As a democracy that ought to be setting the bar for
human rights in the region, Australia is instead imprisoning peaceful
activists, the activist said. "We're always calling on these authoritarian
governments to treat peaceful protesters respectfully and to not jail them,"
she said.
Clément Voule, the UN's special expert on peaceful assembly, expressed his "concern" at Coco's statement.
He declared that nonviolent demonstrators
"never should be criminalised or imprisoned."
Others are opposed. In Australia, there has been significant discussion over whether or not activists, whether violent or nonviolent, should have the right to interfere with other people's lives or companies.
A few "anarchist demonstrators" could not "bring this city to a standstill," despite the New South Wales (NSW) state government's claims that it is "on the side of climate change action."
This Monday, Premier Dominic Perrottet applauded the
choice to imprison Coco and declared that demonstrators "should have the
book thrown at them" if they wanted to endanger our way of life.
David Shoebridge, a political rival, responded,
"Wait till the premier learns about how seriously climate change will
endanger our way of life."
Alister Henskens, Coco's own uncle and a minister in the state administration, agreed that "nobody is above the law" and praised the judgement. And social media was awash with identical remarks on both sides.
In a video shared online, Coco claimed she didn't want to be protesting like this, but the climate catastrophe needed "being in people's way".
"Obviously, it's not pleasant and it's not fun,
but I know that it is important since lives are on the line," she added.
Trend
of stricter legislation
However, some contend that the true problem with Coco's case is that it highlights a wider statewide assault on protests.
She is one of the first people to get a term under new state rules that increased the severity of the punishments for blocking vital infrastructure, such as highways, train lines, tunnels, and bridges.
Victoria and Tasmania similarly passed rules earlier this year toughening the penalties for some types of disruptive demonstrations, including longer prison terms and higher fines.
The pandemic period has witnessed several
flashpoints of debate. Hundreds of people were detained - some for violent acts
- while demonstrating against Australia's harsh lockdown regulations.
In another case, two women who planned a nonviolent Black Lives Matter march in Melbourne were also prosecuted for violating public health regulations.
According to politics and law expert Ron Levy, such
crackdowns will put some Australians' trust in the nation's liberal democratic
protections to the test.
However, he asserts that Australia is a
"utilitarian" culture that frequently prioritises the "public
good" over the rights of individuals. That implies that policies like this
frequently have public support.
According to Dr. Levy, "It's possible that the
more bodily repercussions there are for your speech, the less vigorously we're
going to guard it."
The problem, according to Ms. McNeill, is not that
lawbreakers can't be punished; rather, it is with how disproportionately harsh
the penalties are.
Violet Coco, a nonviolent climate activist, was
sentenced to 15 months while those accused of drunk driving, violence, or drug
offences just received fines or suspended sentences, the author claims.
'Chilling effect'
Among those who think the laws are "politically motivated" and intended expressly to intimidate climate campaigners is Ms. McNeill.
Regardless of their intended audience, it is generally acknowledged that they might have a deterrent impact on protests in general.
According to Dr. Levy, the courts could step in to invalidate the law. A request to have the High Court of Australia do precisely that has already been made by two ladies from NSW.
It has previously occurred. An earlier version of Tasmania's restrictions were eliminated in 2017 after being declared illegal by Australia's highest court.
However, higher courts have also supported what
legal experts claim are related statutes. In 2019, two pro-life campaigners
were unsuccessful in their attempt to overturn the prohibition on their
demonstrating within 150 metres of abortion facilities.
According to Dr. Levy, "The choice usually depends on how well tailored the legislation is - is it too imprecise, does it go too far?
He claims that a major concern will be the
utilisation of lengthy prison sentences.
"This does seem very excessive, and as a former criminal prosecutor myself, I can tell you that prison time is relatively unusual and it should be utilised in restricted instances."
The "true smack," according to Mr. Davis, is that his client was refused bail prior to her appeal, which is rare for a non-violent criminal.
"Normally, you have to be quite horrible to get refused."
Next week, he plans to appeal the bail judgement,
but in the meanwhile, he claims Coco is "trapped in a cell."