Dear friend

On Saturday two fictional CEOs, Mr Bannerman and Mr Tench were sentenced for committing Ecocide. The two separate counts of Ecocide committed by the offenders were reasonably similar.   Yet Mr Bannerman’s sentence was deferred for six months and Mr Tench was sentenced to four years in jail. 

Read on to find out why the sentencing of the two CEOs was so radically different and what it means for wider justice...

Watch a video of the day and interviews with restorative justice participants here.

Please share this email with someone else who needs to hear about this groundbreaking restorative justice approach.

On Saturday 31st March the sentencing of two fictional chief executive officers – Mr Robin Bannerman of Global Petroleum Company (GPC) and John Tench of Glamis Group (GG) took place in a world first event held at the University of Essex organised by the Hamilton Group and the IDCR.  Bannerman and Tench were both found guilty of committing Ecocide as a consequence of their oil extractive operations in the Athabasca tar sands, last year in the Ecocide mock trial held at the Supreme Court of England and Wales.

The sentencing event kicked off with an opening by prosecuting barrister Michael Mansfield QC.  Bannerman and Tench were then both offered the opportunity to enter into a restorative justice conference with those who had been adversely affected by the Ecocide.   Bannerman accepted, Tench declined.

It is becoming increasingly clear that the sanctions available under our archaic legal system are simply not a good match for complex crimes where there may be many offenders and a wide range of victims, including non humans. 

Restorative justice is a visionary approach for healing harm which allows a dialogue to take place between offenders and victims including voices speaking on behalf of the non human world, in order to reach a positive outcome. It has been shown to be far more effective at restoring the damage caused and rehabilitating offenders than more traditional sanctions - such as a jail sentence.

Judge Ian Lawrie adjourned the formal court sentencing for a restorative justice conference to take place. The restorative justice conference took place in a private room, where Mr Bannerman was joined by Roger Cowe - GPC's Chief Sustainability Officer and Paddy Briggs - Chairman of GPC's pension fund.  Bannerman also came face to face with representatives of those who had been adversely affected by the tar sands Ecocide: Jess Philimore represented wider humanity, Carine Nadal represented the Earth, Philippa De Boissiere represented future generations, Peter Smith represented birds and Gerald Amos provided a voice for indigenous peoples.

The conference was streamed online and on screens around the University for members of the public to watch.  Many members were glued to the screen for the most part of the day, gripped by the intense dialogue which deepened and developed through the prompting of particular questions  by facilitator Lawrence Kershen, chair of the Restorative Justice Council.

For me, one of the highlights of the day was being moved to tears by Carine Nadal’s account of how Earth has been affected by the tar sands.  Herself on the brink of crying, Carine stressed the urgent necessity of stopping tar sands operations and for a mutually enhancing relationship between Earth and humanity to be restored.

When the court reconvened for the formal legal sentencing, the Judge deferred Bannerman's sentencing for six months allowing him time to make true his promises agreed to in the restorative justice conference.  

As a result of the four hour restorative justice process, Bannerman agreed to an action plan which set up working groups to look into amongst other things, funding alternative energy sources.

Mr Tench, who refused to take part in the restorative justice process and showed no remorse for committing Ecocide, was sentenced to four years in jail in addition to receiving a formal Restoration Order. The Restoration Order requires Tench  to undertake a number of measures including suspending operations in the tar sands until the area affected is restored to an acceptable level, meeting the financial costs of restoration and publicising his actions.

The process itself wasn’t perfect, but it did demonstrate how restorative justice might work in practice for the corporate crime of Ecocide.  It also demonstrated a massive feat, that it really is possible for guardians to speak on behalf of the non human world. 

The restorative justice threw up many more conundrums.  It highlighted that a debate needs to be taking place about what justice really is and what must be done to uphold justice.  It reminded us that our whole way of living in the developed world is dependent on oil and that it is not just corporations who must change their ways.  You and I, and Governments are all also responsible for environmental destruction and therefore change needs to happen at all levels.

It highlighted that by no means is a law of Ecocide a panacea to solve the many interconnected environmental and social crises we are facing, and most of all, it highlighted that deeper systematic changes are necessary if justice is to be truly upheld. 

Evidently, we don’t have all the answers, I know no-one who does.  But I do know one answer to one problem.  It just so happens to be a pretty big problem with quite a simple answer.  A law of Ecocide can end mass environmental destruction.  This was demonstrated in the mock trial last year, and again in the sentencing event on Saturday.  But more than this;  it could also be a disruptive innovation, a catalyst to prompt the kind of systemic change which is truly needed if justice is to be upheld.

We can only make the crime of Ecocide  a reality if we all stand strong and take action together, in solidarity.  Please send our concept paper and summary to your government.  

With hope and faith,

Louise

Louise Kulbicki
Legal Coordinator