An environmental organization named Greenpeace has been ordered to pay over $660 million (€606 million) in compensation for libel and related accusations made by an oil pipeline firm. This decision was reached by a jury on Wednesday (March 19), stemming from protests against the development of the Dakota Access oil pipeline in North Dakota.
Energy Transfer based in Dallas and its subsidiary Dakota Access filed accusations against Netherlands-based Greenpeace International, along with Greenpeace USA and their supporting organization, the Greenpeace Fund Inc., alleging defamation, trespass, nuisance, civil conspiracy, and other actions.
Greenpeace USA was held responsible for all charges, whereas the others were accountable for certain ones. The compensation amounting to approximately $666.9 million (€613 million) will be distributed among these three organizations.
The jury determined that Greenpeace USA should cover most of the compensation, amounting to approximately $404 million (€371 million). Meanwhile, both Greenpeace Fund Inc. and Greenpeace International would be responsible for paying around $131 million (€120 million) each.
Greenpeace intends to contest the ruling.
Greenpeace said earlier That a substantial payout to the pipeline company could jeopardize the organization's financial stability.
After the ruling from the nine-member jury, Greenpeace’s top legal advisor stated that their efforts will "never cease."
The truly crucial point for today is this, as Deepa Padmanabha stated to journalists outside the courthouse; they plan to gather and determine their subsequent actions.
The organization subsequently stated it intends to contest the ruling.
“The fight against Big Oil it’s not concluded for today," stated Kristin Casper, the General Counsel of Greenpeace International. "We are aware that both the legal system and the facts support us.
She mentioned that the group plans to pursue Energy Transfer in court in July, with hearings set for Amsterdam. This legal action stems from an anti-intimidation lawsuit that was submitted there earlier this past month.
Energy Transfer referred to Wednesday's verdict as a "victory" for "Americans who recognize the distinction between the right to free speech and breaking the law.”
"We are glad that Greenpeace has faced consequences for their actions against our operations; however, this victory truly belongs to the residents of Mandan and all of North Dakota, who endured constant harassment and disturbances due to the protests organized and supported by Greenpeace," the company stated to The Associated Press.
Earlier, the firm stated that the state court case was focused on Greenpeace’s non-compliance with legal regulations rather than freedom of expression concerns.
In a statement, Energy Transfer’s lawyer Trey Cox stated, "The verdict strongly indicates that when peaceful protests turn into unlawful and manipulative acts, those responsible for these excesses will face consequences."
What did the case pertain to?
The case dates back to the demonstrations in 2016 and 2017 against the Dakota AccessPipeline and its intersection with the Missouri River just north of the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe’s reservation.
For many years, the tribe has resisted the pipeline due to concerns about potential threats to their water source.
The multistate pipeline facilitates roughly 5 percent of the United States' daily production. oil production It began carrying oil in the middle of 2017.
Cox claimed that Greenpeace implemented a plan to halt the pipeline's development. In his initial arguments, he accused Greenpeace of hiring individuals from outside the region to participate in protests, providing materials for blockades, arranging or leading protestor training sessions, and disseminating false information about the project with the intent to obstruct it.
Lawyers representing the Greenpeace organizations stated that there was no evidence supporting these allegations, asserting that their staff members were minimally involved or not involved at all in the protests. They also maintained that their groups had no connection to Energy Transfer’s hold-ups in both building progress and financial restructuring.
Post a Comment