Holding people to account

Campaigning often involves efforts to change the law. Sometimes it’s about preserving a law or ensuring that it is properly observed or implemented. And campaigners often have a difficult relationship with the law (see the sections on Direct Action and SOCPA for example)!

But there is another way in which campaigners might need to understand the law. Sometimes the law is actually your ally, and you can invoke it or raise awareness of it to help meet your campaign objectives.
Let’s look at some examples:

• Campaign for Nuclear Disarmanent

Much of CND’s campaigning is about holding the UK Government to account over disarmament commitments it has already made, rather than campaigning for the commitment itself!

According to the CND website, Britain is committed to the elimination of its nuclear weapons under Article VI of the 1968 Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. Further to this, at the NPT Review Conference in 2000, Britain committed to “accomplish the elimination” of its nuclear weapons.

CND argue that the Government has “yet to do anything to implement the 2000 NPT or to fully implement Article VI”.

In July 1996 the International Court of Justice gave an advisory opinion on the legality of nuclear weapons. Their conclusion was that:

" the threat or use of nuclear weapons would generally be contrary to the rules of international law applicable in armed conflict, and in particular the principles and rules of humanitarian law." (para 2E)
and,
"states must never make civilians the object of attack and must consequently never use weapons that are incapable of distinguishing between civilian and military targets." (para 78)

So, by drawing on legislation, official commitments and legal rulings, CND’s campaign is actually rooted in the law.

• Amnesty International

In 2005, Amnesty international published a guide targeted at Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs) and women’s groups to, to enable them to campaign for national legal reform on criminalising violence against women, based on high standards of international practice:

"The gender provisions [of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court] could help strengthen the capacity to address violence against women at the national level”
1 Pam Spees, ‘Women‘s advocacy in the creation of the international criminal court: Changing the
landscapes of justice and power’, 28 Signs: Journal of Women Culture and Society, 2003, p. 1233.

According to the guide “All states have a legal duty under international human rights law to take action to prevent, investigate and punish violence against women. This obligation is sometimes referred to as an obligation to exercise “due diligence”. States must implement their obligation under treaties and customary international law to respect, protect and fulfil human rights in both law and practice. States must fulfil and promote rights so that they are respected by state agents and non-state actors including by maintaining an effective justice system”.

So, while in this case, the campaign wasn’t about getting national Governments to observe their own laws, it was about using international legal precedents and invoking Governments’ obligation for ‘due diligence’, as the platform for campaigning at a national level.

• Greenpeace 

A different angle again is exemplified by Greenpeace’s Annual ‘Emerald Paintbrush’ Award, which they award for what they irreverently describe as ‘greenwashing above and beyond the call of duty’.

In 2008 they gave the award to BP. Although BP have rebranded as going ‘Beyond Petroleum’, Greenpeace argue that the truth is actually more like ‘Back to Petroleum’. Having looked at the company’s accounts, Greenpeace assert that BP allocated 93% of its total investment fund for the development and extraction of oil, gas and other fossil fuels, compared to 1.39% for solar, and 2.79% for wind.

So, what Greenpeace have done is use BP’s marketing and BP’s own corporate accounts as the basis for their campaign. While this isn’t strictly speaking about ‘using the ‘law’ it serves as an interesting example of how to hold Governments and companies to account on their own commitments, promises and communications.

It’s also worth commenting on this Award in the context of campaign tactics and campaign actions – they have used at least two of Saul Alinsky’s ‘Rules for Radicals’
Rule 4: Make opponents live up to their own book of rules.
Rule 5: Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon. It’s hard to counterattack ridicule, and it infuriates the opposition, which then reacts to your advantage.

Here's an amusing video of Greenpeace trying to present the Greenwash Award to BP.