A 9-person North Dakota jury on 19th March convicted Greenpeace, holding it guilty of defamation in a landmark decision, requiring the organization to pay over $660 million to the Texas-based oil corporation Energy Transfer. Greenpeace was found to be liable for defamation and other offenses pertaining to protests that occurred in the state about a decade ago. Greenpeace Fund Inc. and Greenpeace International are each required to pay roughly $131 million and Greenpeace USA is responsible for approximately $404 million.
The decision was rendered following a two-day deliberation. Greenpeace’s role in the demonstrations against the Dakota Access Pipeline, which became a cultural hot spot in the United States over eight years ago, was at the heart of the case, which was heard at the Morton County courthouse in Mandan of North Dakota.
Thousands of protesters gathered at a location in Cannon Ball close to the Standing Rock Sioux Reservation, for the months-long protests. Greenpeace was charged by the Dallas-based firm of organizing the agitation and inciting violence to undermine the company’s reputation. The company is the operator of around 1,200-mile pipeline that transports oil from the Bakken resources in western North Dakota to Illinois.
Greenpeace has denied any involvement in the protests while their spokeswoman confirmed the verdict. Large environmental organizations have called the lawsuit an intimidation ploy meant to suppress free expression and their efforts to prevent new oil and gas development. According to the spokeswoman, Greenpeace intends to file an appeal. Energy Transfer, whose attorneys verified the amount of damages, countered that the complaint is about Greenpeace breaching the law and not an assault on free speech.
During closing arguments, Energy Transfer attorney Trey Cox stated that Greenpeace’s actions resulted in damages ranging from $265 million to $340 million. He requested that the corporation be given that sum as well as further damages.
An Energy Transfer spokesperson, Vicki Granado, conveyed, “While we are pleased that Greenpeace has been held accountable for their actions against us, this win is really for the people of Mandan and throughout North Dakota who had to live through the daily harassment and disruptions caused by the protesters who were funded and trained by Greenpeace. It is also a win for all law-abiding Americans who understand the difference between the right to free speech and breaking the law. That the disrupters have been held responsible is a win for all of us.”
Greenpeace says the verdict will ‘end’ the organisation
Greenpeace stated that a decision in favor of Energy Transfer would probably spell the end for Greenpeace USA, the group’s 50-year-old affiliate in the country. It had 191 employees and almost $40 million in revenue in 2023, the most recent year for which tax filings were accessible.
The verdict was based on nine claims made by Greenpeace that Energy Transfer had desecrated graveyards and used violent methods against demonstrators. According to the firm, the allegations were not only untrue but also a part of a “vast, malicious publicity campaign” that harmed its reputation with the banks that provided funding for the pipeline. Additionally, the pipeline company’s attorneys argued that Greenpeace recruited paid activists, trained protesters and provided them with lockboxes to attach themselves to construction equipment.
At first, they demanded $300 million in damages for the five-month delay in the pipeline’s construction, lost investment and public relations expenses. Greenpeace maintained throughout the trial that it had a negligible impact on the demonstrations spearheaded by the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe. The 1,172-mile pipeline, per Standing Rock tribe members, posed a threat to their water supply and sacred lands. They were concerned that the drinking water on the reservation might be contaminated if the pipeline burst or leaked close to where it crosses the Missouri River.
Energy Transfer asserted that the pipeline was safe and that the construction would boost the local economy by millions of dollars at the time of the protests. Greenpeace’s assertion that the demonstrations constitute protected direct action “comes with direct consequences” when businesses and infrastructure are harmed, based on Scott Segal, head of public policy at the law and lobbying firm Bracewell LLP, which represents many energy clients.
“It is clear that Greenpeace took great liberties in what it told the public about the project. As a result, the jury just reminded Greenpeace that free speech doesn’t include a free pass to defame, disrupt, and destroy,” he highlighted. Greenpeace repeatedly asked that the trial be transferred outside of Morton County prior to its start, claiming that a jury there would not give it a fair trial.
The group’s attorneys claimed in a petition submitted to the Supreme Court of North Dakota that the agitations had severely disrupted rural life and many potential jurors had experienced personal consequences of the same. According to Greenpeace’s petition, other people either worked for the oil sector or claimed to support it. Its pleas were turned down.
Three Greenpeace organizations were mentioned in Energy Transfer’s lawsuit: Greenpeace International, which has its headquarters in the Netherlands, and two US-based organizations. Greenpeace International has filed an anti-intimidation lawsuit against Energy Transfer with the goal of recovering its costs from the defamation lawsuit in the United States by utilizing a new European Union policy that opposes Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation (SLAPP) litigation.
In a video deposition, Kelcy Warren, the founder of Energy Transfer mentioned that his company had offered the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe financial incentives to end the protests, including cash, a new school and a luxury ranch. The tribe turned down the offers, according to a group of monitors at the trial. Warren stated that he believed the tribe rejected the offer because Earthjustice, which has acted as the tribe’s legal counsel, made a better proposal.
The business started using the pipeline to pump crude oil around June 2017. Energy Transfer accused Greenpeace of many violations pertaining to demonstrations against the Dakota Access Pipeline (DAPL) that occurred between April 2016 and February 2017. After a federal judge dismissed Energy Transfer’s $300 million in RICO (Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act) lawsuit in 2017 against Greenpeace due to insufficient evidence, it filed a defamation lawsuit in state court in 2019.
