Environmental activists denied trial by jury

A hearing was held on December 8 and 9 for two environmental activists who blocked traffic on the Jacques Cartier Bridge in October 2024. The blockade was intended to demand the creation of an agency to protect against climate disasters and the closure of Line 9B, a 639-km oil pipeline running from Ontario to Montreal.

Olivier Huard and Jacob Pirro face two criminal charges considered unprecedented by activist organizations such as Last Generation Canada and the Collectif Antigone: mischief and obstruction of a police officer. These two offenses were originally considered serious, and the activists were facing up to 10 years in prison, which is unprecedented for nonviolent activists. The defendants therefore opted for a jury trial.

Due to a tactic by the Attorney General of Canada that had never been used before, the indictment was amended to charge the defendants with a summary offense (a less serious offence), now depriving them of a jury trial, in addition to potentially facing two years in prison.

The prosecution also attempted to stifle the defendants’ freedom of expression by preventing them from speaking to the media as a condition of their release during their initial detention of more than a week in the fall of 2024. The hearing on December 8 and 9 is therefore intended to have the proceedings dismissed on the grounds of abuse of process. If they lose this motion, the trial will take place in February 2026.

Mary Lawlor, United Nations Special Rapporteur on Human Rights Defenders, in a statement published online on December 2, denounced the government’s abuse of process against activists working to protect the environment:

“I’ll be closely following the hearing […] on the motion to dismiss the case against climate defenders Oliver Huard & Jacob Pirro. Both were held in undue pre-trial detention in 2024 before being released with conditions & initially faced up to 10 years in prison for a non-violent, public act of civil disobedience. I am concerned a conviction may lead to a dangerous new precedent for the harsh treatment of climate defenders in the country. “

Jacob Pirro, one of the defendants, describes this crackdown as anti-democratic and a direct attack on freedom of expression:

“What we’re doing as citizens is necessary when governments do not listen to their people and ignore scientific data. When ordinary citizens are not listened to, they are forced to resort to methods they would not normally use.”

In his view, state resources should instead be devoted to supporting communities affected by the fires and floods that have ravaged Canada, particularly in recent years, due to the climate crisis:

“Those who are criminally responsible are not with us in the courtrooms. Prosecutors should be fighting for those who are thirsty, hungry, and tired, instead of fighting those who stand up against injustice.”