Activist learns the hard way that lawfare isn’t free

Caption: Get woke, go broke, indeed.

Whaleoil recently wrote about Greenpeace?s mendacious, yet astonishingly lucrative, business model: invent and exploit an ?issue?, pick an ?enemy?, and solicit donations. Lawfare is another popular tactic with watermelons, who can tie companies up with years (if not decades) of spurious legal actions, at almost no expense to themselves.

However, one activist is finding that being a serial litigant sometimes comes at a very big cost. Quote:

Mining giant Adani has filed a petition to bankrupt an indigenous traditional owner opposed to their controversial Queensland coal mine in an effort to force him to pay over $600,000 in legal costs. End of quote.

The legal landscape is particularly favourable to watermelon activists as governments pile on ever-growing mounds of red tape. Governments also weight proceedings in favour of vexatious activists, allowing them to file a litany of objections at virtually no cost, while paralysing developments, costing millions, if not billions. As Thomas Sowell notes, ?Where an employer is in an industry that is already one subject to government regulatory agencies, whose permission is necessary to engage in ordinary business transactions that unregulated businesses are free to make on their own,? activists are handed massive leverage.

As the costs pile up from stalled developments, companies invariably pay out ?go away money?, while serial pest watermelons strut and crow about their latest ?environmental victory? Quote:

Adani filed the petition in the Federal Court against Wangan and Jagalingou man Adrian Burragubba after his numerous failed court actions to stop their $16.5 billion Carmichael mine in the Galilee Basin. ?Activists should be held to account. They are not above the law,? the company said in a statement today. End of quote.

Try telling them that. Holier-than-thou activists labour under the delusion that their assumed moral purity licenses them to break whatever laws they just don?t like. In fact, Trades Hall boss Sally McManus has baldly stated as much.

A reality check is in order. Quote:

Adani has vowed to donate to charity any funds from Mr Burragubba. He was ordered by the Federal Court to pay Adani?s costs in August. Mr Burragubba has claimed a land use agreement between his people and Adani is invalid because the company failed to explain that once native title is relinquished it cannot be reclaimed.

?Our position has always been the same – that there has never been any free or informed consent with any agreement with Adani,? Mr Burragubba said in August. End of quote.

The only problem is that ?his people? completely disagree. Quote:

Adani said he represents a minority of Wangan and Jagalingou people in opposing the mine, with traditional owners voting 294-to-1 in favour of the land use agreement.

?Mr Burragubba refuses to accept the voice of his own people,? the company said. ?The courts have repeatedly said he has no case. End of quote.

Unfortunately, as we have seen in the past, white, urban conservation groups are happy to exploit Aboriginal Australians as their catspaws. Quote:

?It should be noted that Mr Burragubba has been urged on by environmental groups who now seem to have abandoned him.? End of quote.


Still, history suggests that, when activists fall foul of the law, leftists and their fellow travellers in the public service simply change the laws to rig the game in their friends? favour again. After the 1990s Hindmarsh Bridge protests and almost endless court actions and inquiries, the developers successfully sued activists to the tune of $850,000. As a result, lefty quango the ?Environmental Defenders Office? lobbied for a ?Protection of Public Participation Act?.

In other words: vexatious activists will be immune to the law.