Abstract :
[en] Civil disobedience is generally defined as committing an offense to raise awareness among the
public or to challenge public authorities regarding issues which warrant societal debate. In
recent years, disobedient actions have proliferated, particularly in climate and environmental
causes. These actions have taken various forms, including road or warehouse blockades,
protests at public institutions’ headquarters, and intrusions into factories.
The implicated activists may describe these acts as constituting peaceful democratic challenges
that may potentially justify committing a symbolic offense. However, national and regional
laws have yet to provide legal grounding for such actions, typically considering them only as
offenses without necessarily providing specific exculpatory grounds. Faced with the symbolic
nature of such actions, several national jurisdictions have departed from the traditional penal
response, as seen in Switzerland, France, and more recently, Belgium. To address the illicit
nature of the offenses attributed to activists and prevent criminal conviction, national judges
may reason through the concept of necessity or invoke certain fundamental rights. The
European Court of Human Rights, in particular, has invoked freedom of expression when the
committed offense is seen as an expression of opinion.
In this presentation, we will reflect on the concept of civil disobedience concerning the climate
cause and how it is perceived by national jurisdictions and by the European Court of Human
Rights.
