Author: MIL-OSI Publisher

Posted on

Pakistan: Investigation urgently needed after killings during Iran protests 

Source: Amnesty International –

Responding to the deaths of at least 26 people during protests that erupted across Pakistan on 1 March following the killing of Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ali Khamenei, in US-Israeli attacks on Iran, Babu Ram Pant, Amnesty International’s Deputy Regional Director for South Asia, said: 

“The killing of protesters and reports of the use of lethal ammunition by security forces against these assemblies raises serious concerns about unlawful use of force. Protesters have a right to gather peacefully and express dissent, even in moments of heightened tension. During such crises, security forces must demonstrate their commitment to protecting life and safeguarding peaceful assembly. 

“Even in instances where some protesters turn violent, law enforcement must assess the situation on a case-by-case basis, exercise restraint, and use force only where absolutely necessary. Any force must be proportionate to the seriousness of the offence and legitimate objective, and used solely against those engaged in violence. Lethal force may only be used as a last resort and only be targeted against those posing an imminent threat to life. Authorities must act with restraint to avoid further serious injury and loss of life during future protests. Further, they must take all measures to fulfil their positive obligation to facilitate the right to freedom of peaceful assemblies.  

Even in instances where some protesters turn violent, law enforcement must assess the situation on a case-by-case basis, exercise restraint, and use force only where absolutely necessary

Babu Ram Pant, Amnesty International’s Deputy Regional Director for South Asia

“Amnesty International calls for a thorough, independent, impartial and effective investigation into the deaths and injuries and the use of force deployed by security personnel. The families of those killed and the people injured have the right to a remedy.” 

Background

Major protests took place in the cities of Skardu, Gilgit, Karachi, Islamabad, Lahore, and Peshawar on 1 March. 

It has been reported that at least ten protesters were killed and 96 injured outside the US Consulate in Karachi after protesters breached the premises. Various reports suggest that gunfire was used against protesters, and many of those brought to hospitals had gunshot wounds. At least two protesters were killed and over 30 injured near the Diplomatic Enclave in the capital Islamabad. Protesters reported the use of kinetic impact projectiles and tear gas canisters. Fourteen people, including a solider, were killed in Skardu. In Skardu and Gilgit, protesters set alight the offices of UN Military Observer Group in India and Pakistan (UNMOGIP). In Skardu, a school and some municipal offices were also set ablaze.

Subsequently, all public gatherings were prohibited in Sindh and Punjab provinces and in Islamabad. A curfew was imposed in Skardu city, and the Pakistan Army has been deployed. 

Posted on

Honduras: 10 years without justice for Berta 

Source: Amnesty International –

Ten years after the murder of Lenca Indigenous leader and human rights defender Berta Cáceres, Amnesty International condemns the ongoing violence against those who defend land and the environment in Honduras, and calls on the authorities to carry out a thorough investigation that takes into account new findings revealed by the Interdisciplinary Group of Independent Experts (GIEI), established under the auspices of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR).

“Ten years after the brutal killing of Berta Cáceres, her family and COPINH have only seen partial justice. Those who ordered the crime remain unpunished, and the structural conditions that led to this tragedy have not changed: each year we continue to witness violence and killings of people defending water and forests in Honduras. How much longer?” said Ana Piquer, Americas Director at Amnesty International.

Ten years after the brutal killing of Berta Cáceres, her family and COPINH have only seen partial justice.”

Ana Piquer, Amnesty International’s Regional Director for the Americas.

Posted on

Zimbabwe: Authorities must investigate brutal attack on constitutional lawyer and political activists

Source: Amnesty International –

Responding to the brutal attack in Harare on Professor Lovemore Madhuku, the leader of the opposition National Constitutional Assembly (NCA), and several other political activists on March 1, by armed men in full view of the police, Amnesty International Zimbabwe’s Executive Director, Lucia Masuka, said:

“Professor Lovemore Madhuku, Effort Manono, and other activists from his party had gathered for a meeting when they were violently beaten with batons in the presence of uniformed police officers. This violent attack is a blatant violation of the rights to personal security, freedom of expression, and peaceful assembly.

This violent attack is a blatant violation of the rights to personal security, freedom of expression, and peaceful assembly.

Lucia Masuka, Executive Director, Amnesty International Zimbabwe

“This assault is the latest outrage targeting critics opposed to changing the Constitution to allow the extension of presidential term limits. Zimbabwean authorities must immediately end the escalating crackdown on peaceful dissent, which has seen public meetings banned and critics brutally attacked, arbitrarily detained, and silenced.

Zimbabwean authorities must immediately end the escalating crackdown on peaceful dissent, which has seen public meetings banned and critics brutally attacked, arbitrarily detained, and silenced.

Lucia Masuka

“Authorities must promptly, thoroughly, impartially, independently, transparently, and effectively investigate the attacks on these NCA members and bring to justice those suspected to be responsible.  Authorities must ensure access to justice and effective remedies for victims and their families. They must create an environment that guarantees and ensures the effective exercise of the human rights of everyone in the country, including the rights to freedom of opinion, expression, and peaceful assembly, allowing everyone to peacefully express their opinions without the risk of interference, intimidation, attacks, or reprisals.”

Posted on

Climate change UK energy bills at the mercy of Iran-war gas price shocks In response to news about the gas market reacting to the conflict in the Middle East, Paul Morozzo, senior climate campaigner for Greenpeace UK, said:  “The Strait of Hormuz is… by Graham Thompson March 2, 2026

Source: Greenpeace Statement –

In response to news about the gas market reacting to the conflict in the Middle East, Paul Morozzo, senior climate campaigner for Greenpeace UK, said: 

“The Strait of Hormuz is the pinch point for global gas supplies, and the UK’s energy bills. European gas prices have already surged by 50% in response to Qatar restricting supply, and there are predictions that the attack on Iran could lead to them increasing by 130% [1]. If your energy system uses gas then your energy bill is at the mercy of unstable regimes, in the Middle East and elsewhere, and oil profiteers. The UK’s gas supply, including the little remaining in the declining North Sea basin, is sold to us at market rates by those multinational oil majors. The only way the UK can be secure and self-sufficient in energy production is by using fuel supplies that can’t be disrupted – sunshine and wind.”

ENDS

Notes

  1. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2026-03-01/goldman-says-european-gas-could-jump-130-on-hormuz-disruption 
Posted on

IAEA Director General’s Introductory Statement to the Special Session of the Board of Governors

Source: International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) –

IAEA Director General Rafael Mariano Grossi delivers his statement at the Board of Governors meeting at the Agency’s headquarters in Vienna, Austria, 2 March 2026. (Photo: D. Calma/IAEA)

(As prepared for delivery)

All of us have been following with concern the military attacks in the Islamic Republic of Iran and the Middle East. 

The Agency immediately responded, in accordance with our mandate, by focussing on possible radiological emergencies derived from the military operations. 

The IAEA’s Incident and Emergency Centre (IEC) is in operation, with a dedicated team collecting information and assessing the situation while bearing in mind limitations in communications caused by the conflict. 

The regional safety monitoring network has been put on alert and is liaising with us continuously. So far, no elevation of radiation levels above the usual background levels has been detected in countries bordering Iran.

Regarding the status of the nuclear installations in Iran, up to now, we have no indication that any of the nuclear installations, including the Bushehr Nuclear Power Plant, the Tehran Research Reactor or other nuclear fuel cycle facilities have been damaged or hit.

Efforts to contact the Iranian nuclear regulatory authorities through the IEC continue, with no response so far. We hope this indispensable channel of communication can be reestablished as soon as possible. 

Iran and many other countries in the region that have been subjected to military attacks have operational nuclear power plants and nuclear research reactors, as well as associated fuel storage sites, increasing the threat to nuclear safety. The United Arab Emirates has four operating nuclear reactors; Jordan and Syria have operational nuclear research reactors. Bahrain, Iraq, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar and Saudi Arabia have also been attacked. These countries all use nuclear applications of some sort or the other. We therefore urge utmost restraint in all military operations.

Consistent with the objectives of the IAEA, as enshrined in its Statute, I reiterate my call on all parties to exercise maximum restraint to avoid further escalation.

Let me again recall past General Conference resolutions that state that armed attacks on nuclear facilities should never take place and could result in radioactive releases with grave consequences within and beyond the boundaries of the State which has been attacked.

To achieve the long-term assurance that Iran will not acquire nuclear weapons and for maintaining the continued effectiveness of the global non-proliferation regime, we must return to diplomacy and negotiations.

The Agency will continue to monitor the situation, leveraging its unique resources, deep expertise and wide international network. We will report on any radiological consequence of the current military activity, and we stand ready to advise and support our Member States in case of impacts on nuclear safety and security. 

As you know, I have been closely involved in supporting efforts to find a diplomatic solution to the impasse around Iran’s nuclear program. I was invited by the negotiators to the two most recent rounds of consultations in Geneva, to which I brought the IAEA’s technical and impartial advice. 

An understanding eluded the parties this time. I am sure we are, quite understandably, feeling a strong sense of frustration. 

The use of force has been present in international relations since times immemorial. This is a reality. But it is always the least preferred option.

I remain convinced that the lasting solution to this long-existing discord lies on the diplomatic table. The IAEA will be there, ready to play its indispensable part, whenever and wherever it is called. 

When it comes to nuclear matters, a crystal clear understanding of the scope and verifiability of an agreement is of the essence.

Diplomacy is hard, but it is never impossible. Nuclear diplomacy is even harder, but it is never impossible. 

It is not a matter of if, but of when, we will again gather at that diplomatic table – we simply must do so as quickly as possible. 

Mr Chairman, Excellencies,

Let me close by reiterating that I have been in close contact with affected Member States in the region. The IAEA has extensive knowledge of the nature and location of nuclear and radiological material in the region, and we have clear guidance for actions necessary in case an attack or an accident causes a radiological release, as well as the ability for hands-on help if it is required. Let me underline that the situation today is very concerning. We cannot rule out a possible radiological release with serious consequences, including the necessity to evacuate areas as large or larger than major cities. What I can assure you is that the IAEA is there, working with its Member States, and keeping the international community informed while being ready to react immediately if a breach in nuclear safety occurs. 

Posted on

IAEA Director General’s Introductory Statement to the Extraordinary Board of Governors

Source: International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) –

(As prepared for delivery)

All of us have been following with concern the military attacks in the Islamic Republic of Iran and the Middle East. 

The Agency immediately responded, in accordance with our mandate, by focussing on possible radiological emergencies derived from the military operations. 

The IAEA’s Incident and Emergency Centre (IEC) is in operation, with a dedicated team collecting information and assessing the situation while bearing in mind limitations in communications caused by the conflict. 

The regional safety monitoring network has been put on alert and is liaising with us continuously. So far, no elevation of radiation levels above the usual background levels has been detected in countries bordering Iran.

Regarding the status of the nuclear installations in Iran, up to now, we have no indication that any of the nuclear installations, including the Bushehr Nuclear Power Plant, the Tehran Research Reactor or other nuclear fuel cycle facilities have been damaged or hit.

Efforts to contact the Iranian nuclear regulatory authorities through the IEC continue, with no response so far. We hope this indispensable channel of communication can be reestablished as soon as possible. 

Iran and many other countries in the region that have been subjected to military attacks have operational nuclear power plants and nuclear research reactors, as well as associated fuel storage sites, increasing the threat to nuclear safety. The United Arab Emirates has four operating nuclear reactors; Jordan and Syria have operational nuclear research reactors. Bahrain, Iraq, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar and Saudi Arabia have also been attacked. These countries all use nuclear applications of some sort or the other. We therefore urge utmost restraint in all military operations.

Consistent with the objectives of the IAEA, as enshrined in its Statute, I reiterate my call on all parties to exercise maximum restraint to avoid further escalation.

Let me again recall past General Conference resolutions that state that armed attacks on nuclear facilities should never take place and could result in radioactive releases with grave consequences within and beyond the boundaries of the State which has been attacked.

To achieve the long-term assurance that Iran will not acquire nuclear weapons and for maintaining the continued effectiveness of the global non-proliferation regime, we must return to diplomacy and negotiations.

The Agency will continue to monitor the situation, leveraging its unique resources, deep expertise and wide international network. We will report on any radiological consequence of the current military activity, and we stand ready to advise and support our Member States in case of impacts on nuclear safety and security. 

As you know, I have been closely involved in supporting efforts to find a diplomatic solution to the impasse around Iran’s nuclear program. I was invited by the negotiators to the two most recent rounds of consultations in Geneva, to which I brought the IAEA’s technical and impartial advice. 

An understanding eluded the parties this time. I am sure we are, quite understandably, feeling a strong sense of frustration. 

The use of force has been present in international relations since times immemorial. This is a reality. But it is always the least preferred option.

I remain convinced that the lasting solution to this long-existing discord lies on the diplomatic table. The IAEA will be there, ready to play its indispensable part, whenever and wherever it is called. 

When it comes to nuclear matters, a crystal clear understanding of the scope and verifiability of an agreement is of the essence.

Diplomacy is hard, but it is never impossible. Nuclear diplomacy is even harder, but it is never impossible. 

It is not a matter of if, but of when, we will again gather at that diplomatic table – we simply must do so as quickly as possible. 

Mr Chairman, Excellencies,

Let me close by reiterating that I have been in close contact with affected Member States in the region. The IAEA has extensive knowledge of the nature and location of nuclear and radiological material in the region, and we have clear guidance for actions necessary in case an attack or an accident causes a radiological release, as well as the ability for hands-on help if it is required. Let me underline that the situation today is very concerning. We cannot rule out a possible radiological release with serious consequences, including the necessity to evacuate areas as large or larger than major cities. What I can assure you is that the IAEA is there, working with its Member States, and keeping the international community informed while being ready to react immediately if a breach in nuclear safety occurs. 

Posted on

Press Arrangements for IAEA Board of Governors Meeting, 2 March 2026

Source: International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) –

Vienna, Austria

3/2026

The IAEA Board of Governors will convene a meeting at the Agency’s headquarters starting at 09:00 CET on Monday, 2 March, in Board Room C in the Vienna International Centre (VIC).

The meeting is convened by the Chair of the Board following a request from the Permanent Mission of the Russian Federation to convene a “special session of the IAEA Board of Governors on matters related to military strikes of the United States and Israel against the territory of the Islamic Republic of Iran”. 

This session of the Board of Governors will precede the already scheduled regular session of the Board.

The Board of Governors meeting is closed to the press.

IAEA Director General Rafael Mariano Grossi will open the meeting with an introductory statement, which will be released to journalists after delivery and posted on the IAEA website.  

The IAEA will provide video footage of the Director General’s opening statement here and will make photos available on Flickr.  

Photo Opportunity 

There will be a photo opportunity with the IAEA Director General and the Chair of the Board, Ambassador Ian David Grainge Biggs of Australia, before the start of the Board meeting, on 2 March at 09:00 CET in Board Room C, Building C, 4th floor, in the VIC.  

Accreditation and Press Working Area:

The Press Room on the M-Building’s ground floor will be available as a press working area starting from 8:00 CET on 2 March.

Journalists are requested to register with the Press Office by 06:00 CET on Monday, 2 March. Please email press@iaea.org.

Related resources

Posted on

Greenpeace organisations to appeal USD $345 million court judgment in Energy Transfer’s intimidation lawsuit

Source: Greenpeace Statement –

SYDNEY, Saturday 28 February 2026 — Greenpeace International and Greenpeace organisations in the US announce they will seek a new trial and, if necessary, appeal the decision with the North Dakota Supreme Court following a North Dakota District Court judgment today awarding Energy Transfer (ET) USD $345 million. 

ET’s SLAPP suit remains a blatant attempt to silence free speech, erase Indigenous leadership of the Standing Rock movement, and punish solidarity with peaceful resistance to the Dakota Access Pipeline. Greenpeace International will also continue to seek damages for ET’s bullying lawsuits under EU anti-SLAPP legislation in the Netherlands.

Mads Christensen, Greenpeace International Executive Director said: “Energy Transfer’s attempts to silence us are failing. Greenpeace International will continue to resist intimidation tactics. We will not be silenced. We will only get louder, joining our voices to those of our allies all around the world against the corporate polluters and billionaire oligarchs who prioritise profits over people and the planet. 

“With hard-won freedoms under threat and the climate crisis accelerating, the stakes of this legal fight couldn’t be higher. Through appeals in the US and Greenpeace International’s groundbreaking anti-SLAPP case in the Netherlands, we are exploring every option to hold Energy Transfer accountable for multiple abusive lawsuits and show all power-hungry bullies that their attacks will only result in a stronger people-powered movement.”

The Court’s final judgment today rejects some of the jury verdict delivered in March 2025, but still awards hundreds of millions of dollars to ET without a sound basis in law. The Greenpeace defendants will continue to press their arguments that the US Constitution does not allow liability here, that ET did not present evidence to support its claims, that the Court admitted inflammatory and irrelevant evidence at trial and excluded other evidence supporting the defense, and that the jury pool in Mandan could not be impartial.[1][2]

ET’s back-to-back lawsuits against Greenpeace International and the US organisations Greenpeace USA (Greenpeace Inc.) and Greenpeace Fund are clear-cut examples of SLAPPs — lawsuits attempting to bury nonprofits and activists in legal fees, push them towards bankruptcy and ultimately silence dissent.[3] Greenpeace International, which is based in the Netherlands, is pursuing justice in Europe, with a suit against ET under Dutch law and the European Union’s new anti-SLAPP directive, a landmark test of the new legislation which could help set a powerful precedent against corporate bullying.[4] 

Kate Smolski, Program Director at Greenpeace Australia Pacific, said: “This is part of a worrying trend globally: fossil fuel corporations are increasingly using litigation to attack and silence ordinary people and groups using the law to challenge their polluting operations — and we’re not immune to these tactics here in Australia.

“Rulings like this have a chilling effect on democracy and public interest litigation — we must unite against these silencing tactics as bad for Australians and bad for our democracy. Our movement is stronger than any corporate bully, and grows even stronger when under attack.”

Energy Transfer’s SLAPPs are part of a wave of abusive lawsuits filed by Big Oil companies like Shell, Total, and ENI against Greenpeace entities in recent years.[3] A couple of these cases have been successfully stopped in their tracks. This includes Greenpeace France successfully defeating TotalEnergies’ SLAPP on 28 March 2024, and Greenpeace UK and Greenpeace International forcing Shell to back down from its SLAPP on 10 December 2024.

-ENDS-

Images available in Greenpeace Media Library

Notes: 

[1] The judgment entered by North Dakota District Court Judge Gion follows a jury verdict finding Greenpeace entities liable for more than US$660 million on March 19, 2025. Judge Gion subsequently threw out several items from the jury’s verdict, reducing the total damages to approximately US$345 million. 

[2] Public statements from the independent Trial Monitoring Committee  

[3] Energy Transfer’s first lawsuit was filed in federal court in 2017 under the RICO Act – the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, a US federal statute designed to prosecute mob activity. The case was dismissed in 2019, with the judge stating the evidence fell “far short” of what was needed to establish a RICO enterprise. The federal court did not decide on Energy Transfer’s claims based on state law, so Energy Transfer promptly filed a new case in a North Dakota state court with these and other state law claims.

[4] Greenpeace International sent a Notice of Liability to Energy Transfer on 23 July 2024, informing the pipeline giant of Greenpeace International’s intention to bring an anti-SLAPP lawsuit against the company in a Dutch Court. After Energy Transfer declined to accept liability on multiple occasions (September 2024, December 2024), Greenpeace International initiated the first test of the European Union’s anti-SLAPP Directive on 11 February 2025 by filing a lawsuit in Dutch court against Energy Transfer. The case was officially registered in the docket of the Court of Amsterdam on 2 July, 2025. Greenpeace International seeks to recover all damages and costs it has suffered as a result of Energy Transfers’s back-to-back, abusive lawsuits demanding hundreds of millions of dollars from Greenpeace International and the Greenpeace organisations in the US. The next hearing in the Court of Amsterdam is scheduled for 16 April, 2026.

Media contact: 

Kate O’Callaghan on 0406 231 892 or [email protected]

Posted on

What today’s judgment means for Greenpeace USA

Source: Greenpeace Statement –

© Greenpeace

A final judgment has officially been entered in Big Oil company Energy Transfer’s massive lawsuit against us.

Nearly a year after a North Dakota jury decided that three Greenpeace entities are liable for more than $660 million in damages, today the Court awarded Energy Transfer $345 million.

But today is not the end of this case — or Greenpeace USA.

We will request a new trial, and — if necessary — appeal the decision with the North Dakota Supreme Court. The law is firmly on our side, and we are confident in our strong arguments for an appeal.

As the next chapter of this now eight-year legal saga begins, we want to thank every Greenpeace supporter. Your commitment, your shared concern about the wider threat this lawsuit poses to the work of so many organizations and individuals, has powered us forward.

Together, we’re going to show Big Oil that they won’t sue us out of existence.

Greenpeace USA’s more than fifty-year legacy of nonviolent direct action, peaceful protest, and exposing environmental harm will live on.

Energy Transfer is trying to silence our movement

Donate to the Warrior Defense Fund to help us fight back.

Donate

“They’re going to pay for this.”

That’s what Energy Transfer’s board chair Kelcy Warren said in 2017 after his company first sued Greenpeace entities for supporting the Indigenous-led Standing Rock resistance.

In their closing statement at trial, Energy Transfer’s lawyer confirmed that was still their mission. They told the jury that “solidarity” and “Indigenous leadership” are actually deceptive code words, and that ruling in Energy Transfer’s favor is about more than this case.

This lawsuit has always been about Big Oil trying to make someone “pay” for the Dakota Access Pipeline protests, erase Indigenous sovereignty, and weaken the climate movement.

What happened at Standing Rock scared Big Oil. They saw a grassroots, Indigenous-led protest in North Dakota organically grow into an international resistance that activated millions.

They saw how powerful the climate movement can be. Energy Transfer sought massive “exemplary damages” because they want this case to be a warning to any person or organization that thinks about exercising their right to speak out or peacefully protest.

With Donald Trump back in the White House, this playbook is now everywhere you look: comply and stay silent, or your institution will be destroyed.

It’s not a coincidence that Energy Transfer and Kelcy Warren are Trump’s largest fossil fuel industry donors. And it’s not a coincidence that all of this is happening just as the world is running out of time to achieve existential climate goals.

While it remains both possible — and economically viable — for humanity to curb climate pollution on the scale that’s necessary, that won’t happen through incremental change. The changes we need will require the mass mobilization of a global climate movement.

But in the years since the Standing Rock protests, anti-protest laws have spread across the U.S. and the world. Two of the most important components of change and progress throughout human history — free speech and peaceful protest — have never been more endangered.

We must defend those rights. Our future depends on it.

We’re not going to allow Big Oil to stop us from living our values and building the better world we know is possible.

While there are many reasons to be worried right now, there are even more to be hopeful. We have a lot of work ahead of us, but we’re in this together.

Together, we’re going to hold polluting fossil fuel companies financially accountable for the damage they’ve caused.

Together, we’re going to protect our oceans and ban deep sea mining.

Together, we’re going to achieve a global plastics treaty.

Together, we’re going to defend democracy from facism.

Our work continues.

Posted on

Greenpeace organizations to appeal US $345 million North Dakota court judgment in Energy Transfer’s intimidation lawsuit

Source: Greenpeace Statement –

Some of the Greenpeace team hold up a banner outside the Morton County Memorial Courthouse in Mandan, North Dakota March 16, 2025.

© Stephanie Keith / Greenpeace

MANDAN, N.D. (February 27, 2026)  — Greenpeace organizations in the U.S. and Greenpeace International announce they will seek a new trial and, if necessary, appeal the decision with the North Dakota Supreme Court following a North Dakota District Court judgment today awarding Energy Transfer (ET) $345 million. ET’s SLAPP suit remains a blatant attempt to silence free speech, erase Indigenous leadership of the Standing Rock movement, and punish solidarity with peaceful resistance to the Dakota Access Pipeline. Greenpeace International will also continue to seek damages for ET’s bullying lawsuits under EU anti-SLAPP legislation in the Netherlands.

“Speaking out against corporations that cause environmental harm should never be deemed unlawful,” said Marco Simons, Interim General Counsel at Greenpeace USA and Greenpeace Fund. “It is guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution, and is essential to the protection of communities and the health of democracy. This is a setback, but the movement to defend people and the planet has always faced setbacks and resistance, and Energy Transfer will fail in its goal of silencing its critics. 

“The absurdity of this judgment can easily be illustrated. These Greenpeace organizations have been held responsible for supposedly delaying a pipeline that to this day does not have legal authority to operate, and which was actually delayed by the decisions of the US Army Corps of Engineers. The judgment includes tens of millions of dollars for signing a letter also signed by 500 other organizations, which echoed statements made in United Nations reports. If the courts still believe in justice, this result will not stand.”

The Court’s final judgment today rejects some of the jury verdict delivered in March 2025, but still awards hundreds of millions of dollars to ET without a sound basis in law. The Greenpeace defendants will continue to press their arguments that the US Constitution does not allow liability here, that ET did not present evidence to support its claims, that the Court admitted inflammatory and irrelevant evidence at trial and excluded other evidence supporting the defense, and that the jury pool in Mandan could not be impartial.[1][2]

ET’s back-to-back lawsuits against Greenpeace International and the US organizations Greenpeace USA (Greenpeace Inc.) and Greenpeace Fund are clear-cut examples of SLAPPs — lawsuits attempting to bury nonprofits and activists in legal fees, push them towards bankruptcy and ultimately silence dissent.[3] Greenpeace International, which is based in the Netherlands, is pursuing justice in Europe, with a suit against ET under Dutch law and the European Union’s new anti-SLAPP directive, a landmark test of the new legislation which could help set a powerful precedent against corporate bullying.[4] 

“Energy Transfer’s attempts to silence us are failing. Greenpeace International will continue to resist intimidation tactics,” said Mads Christensen, Greenpeace International Executive Director. “We will not be silenced. We will only get louder, joining our voices to those of our allies all around the world against the corporate polluters and billionaire oligarchs who prioritise profits over people and the planet. 

“With hard-won freedoms under threat and the climate crisis accelerating, the stakes of this legal fight couldn’t be higher. Through appeals in the US and Greenpeace International’s groundbreaking anti-SLAPP case in the Netherlands, we are exploring every option to hold Energy Transfer accountable for multiple abusive lawsuits and show all power-hungry bullies that their attacks will only result in a stronger people-powered movement.”

Greenpeace USA recently released a meticulously researched report on Energy Transfer’s pattern of pollution and legal violations, documenting hundreds of incidents and violations including four major disasters since September 2024. “If Energy Transfer thought their lawsuit would silence us, they are seriously mistaken,” said Tim Donaghy, Greenpeace USA Research Director and lead author of the report. “There’s something wrong with a system that too often lets polluters off the hook but penalizes those who call out harm. Free speech is an essential tool in building a healthier and more sustainable world. If people do not feel free to speak out against those who are polluting the air and water, and whose business model is driving us toward climate collapse, then what chance do we have of enacting solutions to these problems?”

Energy Transfer’s SLAPPs are part of a wave of abusive lawsuits filed by Big Oil companies like Shell, Total, and ENI against Greenpeace entities in recent years.[3] A couple of these cases have been successfully stopped in their tracks. This includes Greenpeace France successfully defeating TotalEnergies’ SLAPP on 28 March 2024, and Greenpeace UK and Greenpeace International forcing Shell to back down from its SLAPP on 10 December 2024.

Photos and Videos can be accessed from the Greenpeace Media Library.

Notes: 

  1. The judgment entered by North Dakota District Court Judge Gion follows a jury verdict finding Greenpeace entities liable for more than US$660 million on March 19, 2025. Judge Gion subsequently threw out several items from the jury’s verdict, reducing the total damages to approximately US$345 million. [
  2. Public statements from the independent Trial Monitoring Committee  
  3. Energy Transfer’s first lawsuit was filed in federal court in 2017 under the RICO Act – the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, a US federal statute designed to prosecute mob activity. The case was dismissed in 2019, with the judge stating the evidence fell “far short” of what was needed to establish a RICO enterprise. The federal court did not decide on Energy Transfer’s claims based on state law, so Energy Transfer promptly filed a new case in a North Dakota state court with these and other state law claims.
  4. Greenpeace International sent a Notice of Liability to Energy Transfer on 23 July 2024, informing the pipeline giant of Greenpeace International’s intention to bring an anti-SLAPP lawsuit against the company in a Dutch Court. After Energy Transfer declined to accept liability on multiple occasions (September 2024, December 2024), Greenpeace International initiated the first test of the European Union’s anti-SLAPP Directive on 11 February 2025 by filing a lawsuit in Dutch court against Energy Transfer. The case was officially registered in the docket of the Court of Amsterdam on 2 July, 2025. Greenpeace International seeks to recover all damages and costs it has suffered as a result of Energy Transfers’s back-to-back, abusive lawsuits demanding hundreds of millions of dollars from Greenpeace International and the Greenpeace organizations in the US. The next hearing in the Court of Amsterdam is scheduled for 16 April, 2026. 

Contacts: Madison Carter, National Press Secretary, Greenpeace USA: [email protected], [email protected]