Is that in the spirit of the law? I could see a fine, scaled to personal wealth. But imprisoning them, what threat did she actually pose? What were the worst possible consequences of massively profitable companies not talking for a bit?
this post was submitted on 17 Jun 2023
21 points (95.7% liked)
Green - An environmentalist community
5146 readers
16 users here now
This is the place to discuss environmentalism, preservation, direct action and anything related to it!
RULES:
1- Remember the human
2- Link posts should come from a reputable source
3- All opinions are allowed but discussion must be in good faith
Related communities:
- /c/collapse
- /c/antreefa
- /c/gardening
- /c/[email protected]
- /c/biology
- /c/criseciv
- /c/eco
- /c/[email protected]
- SLRPNK
Unofficial Chat rooms:
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
New Zealand, you disappoint me. Looks like the judges got owned by the oil industry
To be facing 10 years she must have been charged under section 255 subsection 1 of the Crimes Act 1961. It doesn't seem from the article that her intentions met the criteria in that subsection which states "Every one is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 10 years who makes a false document with the intention of using it to obtain any property, privilege, service, pecuniary advantage, benefit, or valuable consideration."