52 UNIT 07 | You be the judge Read the text about the legal consequences of protests. Some parts are missing. Choose the correct part from the list (A–K) for each gap (1–8). There are two extra parts that you should not use. Write your answers in the boxes provided. The first one (0) has been done for you. READING 4 Harsh anti-protest laws restrict freedom of speech, advocates say A new oil pipeline was looming in Oklahoma, and Ashley McCray wanted to be part of the resistance. She and other activists set up camp near McCurtain, one of the towns where the Diamond Pipeline (0) . Only days after McCray and the coalition announced their plans to resist the Diamond Pipeline construction, an Oklahoma state lawmaker introduced a bill to increase penalties for interfering with pipeline projects and other “critical infrastructure.” The law, which the governor signed, (1) and $100,000 in fines – and up to $1 million for any group organizing protests. Merely stepping onto land intended for a pipeline suddenly risked a year in prison. Some other laws would expand definitions of rioting and terrorism and would even increase penalties for blocking traffic. Since then, at least 21 states have responded to climate activism by rolling out such critical infrastructure laws that (2) . In 2017, 84 members of Congress wrote a letter to the Attorney General asking if protesters who tamper with pipelines (3) . Sponsors of the state pipeline bills also invoked terrorism. “There’s a legal process to stop something,” said Oklahoma state representative Mark McBride, a Republican who sponsored another bill that assigns civil liability to anyone who pays protesters. “But if you’re chaining yourself to a bulldozer or you’re standing in the way of a piece of equipment digging a ditch or whatever, it might be, yes, you’re causing harm to the project and to the person that (4) .” In the UK, climate activists have also faced harsh anti-protest laws. In 2024, a London court found 22-year-old Cressie Gethin and four other members of the Just Stop Oil activist group guilty of “conspiring intentionally to cause a public nuisance.” They (5) along the M25 – a major ring road around London – bringing traffic to a standstill in parts over four days in November 2022. Gethin and three others are serving four-year jail terms, though all are appealing. The sentences are believed to be the longest in the UK’s history for non-violent protest and (6) that supercharged policing powers to crack down on disruptive protests, even when they are peaceful. Big Oil (the term used for the world’s biggest oil and gas companies) has poured money into think tanks and charities that have had an influence on climate and protest laws. This raises questions about why they would do so. Activists like Gethin say their demonstrations are proportionate to the problem at hand – a rapidly warming world that (7) , through deadly extreme weather events and by pushing ecosystems to their brinks. They are now battling the harsh powers of the police and courts to get their point across. Gethin says, “It is a pretty clear message, isn’t it? You’re demanding change that (8) , so you must be stopped. The sad truth is that visible, disruptive action is the main thing that keeps it on the political agenda.” Amnesty International has said these laws mark a “dark new era for protest rights,” and give police “license to close down almost any protest they wish.” The question remains: who really benefits when such drastic measures are taken to stop environmental protests? Nur zu Prüfzwecken – Eigentum des Verlags öbv
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTA2NTcyMQ==