In a high-profile trial, climate justice activists faced sentencing for their participation in protests demanding an international treaty to end the extraction and burning of oil and coal by 2030. The protests, which included spray-painting cultural heritage sites, targeting artwork, and disrupting major sporting events, drew attention and criticism.

According to prosecutors, the 2022 protests, during which 45 people climbed gantries, resulted in an economic cost of at least £765,000. The Metropolitan Police also incurred costs exceeding £1.1 million ($1.4 million). Prosecutors alleged that the protests caused more than 50,000 hours of vehicle delays, impacting over 700,000 vehicles, and compromising the M25 for more than 120 hours.

The judge presiding over the case expressed disapproval of the activists' actions, stating that they had "crossed the line from concerned campaigner to fanatic." One incident during the protests resulted in a police officer suffering concussion and bruising after being knocked off his motorbike in the midst of traffic.

The sentences handed down to the activists have attracted criticism from environmental agencies and scientists. Just Stop Oil described the decision as "an obscene perversion of justice," while Professor Bill McGuire from the University College London deemed the trial and verdict a "farce." He criticized the judge's characterisation of climate breakdown as a matter of opinion and belief, calling it nonsensical and showcasing a lack of understanding.

Greenpeace UK's program director, Amy Cameron, decried the outcome as a "dark day for the right to protest, a pillar of our democracy." She questioned the rationale behind imprisoning individuals for planning peaceful demonstrations or discussing them on Zoom calls, while allowing polluting elites to continue degrading the planet. Professor McGuire echoed these sentiments, asserting that the trial and verdict were an assault on free speech and displayed crass stupidity in disregarding the urgency of climate change.

Sir David King, the government's former Chief Scientific Adviser, expressed his dismay at the sentences, labeling them as "disgraceful."

As the climate justice activists face the consequences of their actions, their case has ignited debate over the right to protest, the urgency of addressing climate change, and the balance between environmental activism and the rule of law. The fallout from this trial may have lasting implications for future environmental protests and the wider discussion on climate justice and the responsibility of governments to take concrete action.