Legal professionals for the pipeline firm Vitality Switch and Greenpeace fired their opening salvos in a North Dakota courtroom Wednesday morning in a civil trial that would bankrupt the storied environmental group.
The go well with revolves across the position Greenpeace performed in huge protests in opposition to building of the Dakota Entry Pipeline almost a decade in the past. The pipeline, which carries crude oil from North Dakota throughout a number of states to a switch level in Illinois, was delayed for months in 2016 and 2017 amid lawsuits and protests.
The trial commenced on Wednesday with opening arguments in a quiet county courthouse in Mandan, N.D. Greenpeace says Vitality Switch, which constructed the Dakota Entry Pipeline, is looking for $300 million in damages.
Vitality Switch, one of many largest pipeline corporations within the nation, accused Greenpeace of inciting unrest that value it tens of millions of {dollars} in misplaced financing, building delays, and safety and public-relations bills. Trey Cox, its lead lawyer, informed the nine-person jury that his group would show that Greenpeace had “deliberate, organized and funded” illegal protests. He referred to as the trial a “day of reckoning.”
Everett Jack Jr., the lead lawyer for Greenpeace, gave an in depth timeline to rebut points of that account, saying Greenpeace performed a minor position within the demonstrations, which drew an estimated 100,000 folks to the agricultural space.
The protests originated with the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe, which argued {that a} portion of the pipeline beneath Lake Oahe, on federal land close to its reservation, endangered the water provide and sacred websites on its ancestral territory. The tribe started protesting in spring 2016 and filed lawsuits aimed toward stopping the pipeline’s operations. The Dakota Entry Pipeline has been working since 2017, although closing approval is pending.
Conflicts between protesters, legislation enforcement and personal safety forces started in August 2016, the lawyer for Greenpeace mentioned, and the numbers of demonstrators swelled. Mr. Jack mentioned the protests had already escalated into harmful confrontations earlier than Greenpeace was concerned.
He pointed to Sept. 3, 2016, when he mentioned personal safety launched canine on folks protesting that Vitality Switch was bulldozing in an space the place a tribal chief had asserted there have been cultural artifacts. It was a confrontation that drew media consideration and induced extra folks to affix the protests, however on the time nobody from Greenpeace had arrived there, Mr. Jack mentioned.
He mentioned two workers members had arrived two days after that confrontation, with a purpose to carry a photo voltaic truck to supply electrical energy. Mr. Jack mentioned Greenpeace was dedicated to nonviolence and bought concerned to not incite unrest, however somewhat to assist “de-escalate” and supply assist like tents and coaching. He informed the jury there was no proof to assist the competition that Greenpeace was chargeable for the protests.
In his opening arguments for Vitality Switch, Mr. Cox cited Greenpeace’s inside emails and publications, together with a letter to worldwide lenders signed by Greenpeace and different teams. That letter, written by BankTrack, a Dutch group that works on environmental causes, referred to as on Vitality Switch’s lenders to halt loans for the Dakota Entry venture. Mr. Cox mentioned the marketing campaign had led the venture to lose lenders and refinance at greater charges.
Greenpeace mentioned there was no proof that the banks had made choices primarily based on the letter, which was signed by greater than 500 teams.
Through the two-day jury choice that began on Monday, quite a few potential jurors indicated that they or their kinfolk had ties to the oil and fuel business or to native legislation enforcement officers who had been concerned in responding to the protests. That was anticipated given the prominence of the oil and fuel business within the area, and will give Vitality Switch a bonus within the trial.
The chosen jurors consisted of eight ladies and three males, together with two alternates.
Legal professionals for 2 different entities named within the lawsuit, Greenpeace Worldwide, primarily based within the Netherlands, and Greenpeace Fund, primarily based in Washington, additionally made statements in courtroom. They mentioned their organizations had been separate and had not been concerned with the protests.
The trial is scheduled to final 5 weeks.
