Keep up with the news by installing RT’s extension for . Never miss a story with this clean and simple app that delivers the latest headlines to you.


Russia softens charges against Greenpeace activists from piracy to hooliganism

23.10.2013 16:31

Russia’s Investigative Committee has stated that the charges against the Greenpeace activists from the Arctic Sunrise have been softened from “piracy” to “hooliganism”.

View full story

Comments (41) Sort by: Highest rating Oldest first Newest first


internet guy 11.11.2013 12:07

LoL, "peaceful protest"? More like disturbing the peace.

Gree npeace is known for using violent tactics like ramming ships, and using projectiles. How can anyone call attacking ships at sea, in other words piracy, peaceful?

W ho's funding them anyway that they can afford these expensive ships, and all the replacements when they're damaged or impounded?


Count Cash 09.11.2013 15:39

Jaybee well said, Greenpeace probably did the PR and donation acid test - What was in it for them financially - that test failed, hence the no show and innatention! Same fro Fukishima - truth is they are in league with certain Govts for their own ends - which are always financial!


jaybee 09.11.2013 04:55

Greenpeace is a scam promoted by the large capitalist banksters. In 2010 my partners and I hurridly made ready an oil skimmer which would have been in position to recover up to 10000 gallons an hour of the crude oil two weeks after the Deepwater Horizon disaster. The facts are that skimming technology has developed to such a degree that with a relatively modest investment oil rigs all over the world would be able to have almost any spill contained and mopped up. We wern't allowed to skim up any oil, and Greenpeace never showed up anywhere even while the "cleanup' workers were poisining the marshes with Corexits.


Lolu Lolu 31.10.2013 07:17

logical-americ an 24.10.2013 13:55

Als o, 7 years for 'hooliganism'? Still quite disproportionate, don't you think?


In Singapore a capital punishment exists for having narcotics. Do you respect this law? If you don't, you are in trouble in Singapore and no one would help you.
Every country had different laws and you have to respect the law of a country you are in.


Lolu Lolu 31.10.2013 07:13

john 24.10.2013 13:59

'Hang their posters?' Another terrifying act of piracy halted. All that the Russian prosecutors have successfully done is fan the flames. Instead of the story being Greenpeace show up at a platform....


And we will stop right here. They violated 500m safety zone around the platform and will be accountable for this. Then disobeying orders if coast guards, then pushing the boat of coast guards at rough seas, lots of other interesting things. All this stuff counts for good 7 years in jail and if Russia is very kind, might be a year or two.


Lolu Lolu 31.10.2013 07:08

john 24.10.2013 15:08

You are just being absurd now Count Cash. Russia has done something stupid and now


It is Greenpeace guys who did lots of stupid things violating the law, Russia strictly follows the law in this instance. Greenpeace's strategy is protesting via breaking the law, likewise the law may apply its full force in such instances. The Russians are the guys delivering this simple message


Count Cash 25.10.2013 08:42

Indeed it us up to Russia to take its own view on this, how much development of the Arctic….. it is our sovereign right to make that decision and live with consequences. We made that very clear when we signed up to sea laws with a normal piece of text indicating that we would not be bound by it in areas of law enforcement concerning sovereign jurisdiction. The Dutch or anyone else cannot try to take that temporally and spatially distinct declaration, and embed it within the decision making of the law that it is superior to and regulatory over. Who knows what regrets will be - maybe none!


Andrew Pate 24.10.2013 21:56

Given that mining the artic oil causing global warming is likely to result in the death of hundreds worldwide over the next century or two, what exactly was the nature of the real threat posed to the rigs employees?
(RT please elaborate)

Anyway at least Russia didn't attempt to blow up the Arctic Sunrise, Like the french did to the Rainbow warrior in 1985, killing a member of the crew. I wonder in hindsite if the French have really benefited financially, politically and militarily from their nuclear tests in Moruroa, I doubt it.

Maybe Russia will doubt the benefits of exploiting the artics oil too in 30 years time.


Count Cash 24.10.2013 15:21

See the back door the Dutch were trying to use, the abuse they were attempting, was the procedural nature of due regard for others in the law. They wanted to let their flag carrying vessel do anything, rely on its sovereignty, and then do nothing in response to complaints from the coastal state (Russia had complained for months). That was the Dutch game to get ‘Freedom of interfering boarding protest’ into ‘law’. The problem is that their right to swing their fist ends where our nose starts! When they come against our law enforcements sovereign rights!


Count Cash 24.10.2013 15:15

Correct it does not exist, but that is exactly the concept the Dutch were trying to get introduced into international law by the back door by abusing the law. Yes what the Dutch are trying to do is absurd, to try to establish that boarding rigs and ships is lawful use of the sea. We don’t think it is and we share the view that it would be absurd to try to argue such a right can be created in the UNCLOS. But let’s see what the Tribunal says about it. If they throw the case out based on the absurdity of the Dutch trying to create this nonsense, then it will be a great day in maritime law!


john 24.10.2013 15:08

You are just being absurd now Count Cash. Russia has done something stupid and now you are suggesting it is some grand fight for national sovereignty. No such concept as ‘Freedom of interfering boarding Protest’ exists in international maritime law for fairly obvious reasons. And even if it did, there is not a snowballs chance in a volcano that there is or ever could be an international consensus on it. And even if there was, Russia would not be obliged to change its domestic law.

Add comment

Authorization required for adding comments

Register or



Show password


or Register

Request a new password


or Register

To complete a registration check
your Email:


or Register

A password has been sent to your email address

Edit profile



New password

Retype new password

Current password



Follow us