THURROCK Council appears to have taken speedy action to try and mediate the possibility of high court action against it following what may have been an ill-advised legal blunder.

As reported last week on Thurrock Nub News, Thurrock Council, in partnership with Essex County Council and with the co-operation of Essex Police who handed over arrest records, led the way in obtaining a High Court injunction against known campaigners supporting the JustStopOil protest and anyone planning to take action at sites across the borough.

The JustStopOil organisation mounted a campaign, starting on 1 April at oil and fuel sites across the country, but Thurrock became the focal point of its activities as roads were blocked, trespass and protest took place at fuel terminals and campaigners even tunnelled under roads and spent days there.

The policing operation to deal with the incidents cost well over £1 million and tied up officers from across the country. More than 450 arrests were made.

While the road and fuel terminal protests infuriated and inconvenienced many Thurrock residents, there were few instances of actual significant damage to property at sites in the borough.

However, in action at service stations around the M25 last week JustStopOil campaigners smashed petrol pumps that put them out of action.

The injunction brought by Thurrock Council was granted in the High Court last Sunday and publicised in the early hours of Monday morning.

Within details published online, the council named and gave full addresses, including house numbers of more than 200 people who had been arrested.

When it was pointed out that by doing so the council was acting contrary to naming conventions operated by Essex Police and its own legal teams in other injunctions, the council redacted the address details online.

Bus stops in Aveley and Grays

But on Tuesday and Wednesday of last week the council distributed all those details and more – including full details of how the named campaigners were arrested and what for – including those people who were not charged and who were subsequently released.

At many sites across the borough, including on lampposts, bus stops and street signs, those packs were readily available for anyone to read or take away.

When the JustStopOil campaign learned of the council's actions – which appear to be a breach of data protection and certainly conflicted with a previous high court ruling issued about 'naming and shaming' people who were subject to injunctions, the council was warned the campaigners were considering legal action – something that could cost the council a significant amount in legal costs alone, never mind any subsequent damages, if it were found guilty.

Putting the full details of arrests in the public domain prior to any pending court cases is also a potential contempt of court.

So yesterday (Saturday, 30 April) council officers were once again deployed to take down the information – though some full packs were still in place at sites including outside the Grays Navigator Oil terminal on Oliver Road late yesterday afternoon

JustStopOil contacted Thurrock Council on Friday to say: "It has come to our attention that Thurrock Council has publicly displayed the names and addresses of JustStopOil supporters around the borough on lamp posts and bus stops. This is clearly a dangerous, irresponsible and unjust act. 

"We understand that you have been asked to redact these details from the injunction where they are displayed on your website but that they have been retained in the physical copies of the injunction displayed around the Borough.

"We ask that you remove these details immediately. We note that in a similar case with Insulate Britain the Highways Agency was compelled by a High Court Judge to redact addresses, for the safety of the protestors. We request that you do the same."

Thurrock Nub News also contacted the council and its leader, Cllr Rob Gledhill, on Friday and asked for a comment on its actions and if it believed it was acting illegally or irresponsibly? Neither the council, nor Cllr Gledhill, has responded – though it appears yesterday's action in removing the controversial information shows a message has been received.

Nub News editor Neil Speight comments: "Since April 1 when I was notified of the first protest at the Navigator Terminal, Nub News has covered these protests, including live film of the action of protesters and police.

"Not for one second should any illegal activity by protesters be condoned and it is absolutely right and proper that the police act and arrest where appropriate and in due course that those who break the law pay for their actions through fines or even imprisonment. They accepted that would be a result of their actions when they embarked on them.

"It is a fundamental right in the UK to be able to protest and make your views known – but it is also right that there are legal measures to ensure laws are not broken and undue inconvenience to others caused, hence the council taking out the injunction within the law.

"What cannot be right is that the council itself breaks to law to stop others breaking the law. That is the first step on a very dangerous road and the council should, in due course be held to account for its actions in posting this information – which by doing so puts individuals, who have not broken the law, being put in harm's way and at risk of retaliatory action.

"It's another blunder by a council that keeps making legal mistakes – something that led to the departure of the legal and monitoring officer at considerable cost last year, though it appears that hasn't solved a problem.

"There are questions that the council and Cllr Gledhill needs to answer and while it appears clear those questions are not going to be answered because of the council's official and unconscionable action in refusing to answer legitimate questions from the media, it is to be hoped that councillors of all political persuasions will show the moral courage to hold their officers to account."

The ban on Nub News was implemented last December after our continued investigations and reporting about the massively over-budget and delayed A13 widening project. Since then opposition councillors, and some Conservatives, have attempted to have the ban debated at full council but the ruling Conservative group declined to allow time for discussion or the answering of questions.