Skip to content
Breaking

'Stansted 15' protestors who stopped Home Office deportation flight have convictions overturned

The 15 protestors cut through the airport's perimeter fence in March 2017 and locked themselves together around a Boeing 767 jet

File photo dated 24/11/20 of six members of the so-called Stansted 15 (left to right) May MacKeith, Ben Smoke, Helen Brewer, Emma Hughes, Mel Evans, and Ruth Potts outside the Royal Courts of Justice in London. The protesters taken to court after preventing a deportation flight from taking off from Stansted Airport are to learn the outcome of their Court of Appeal challenge against their convictions.
Image: The 15 protesters were taken to court after stopping a deportation flight taking off from Stansted Airport. Pic: File
Why you can trust Sky News

Protesters taken to court after stopping a deportation flight taking off from Stansted Airport have had their convictions overturned by the Court of Appeal.

The protestors - known as the "Stansted 15" - cut through the Essex airport's perimeter fence in March 2017 and locked themselves together around a Boeing 767 jet authorised by the Home Office to transport people from UK detention centres for repatriation to Africa.

They were convicted at Chelmsford Crown Court in December 2018 of intentional disruption of services at an aerodrome under the Aviation and Maritime Security Act 1990 (AMSA), and the following February three people were given suspended jail sentences and the others handed community orders.

But in a judgment published today, the Lord Chief Justice, Lord Burnett, sitting with Mr Justice Jay and Mrs Justice Whipple, overturned their convictions.

They ruled that the protesters should not have been prosecuted for the "extremely serious offence" they were charged with under AMSA "because their conduct did not satisfy the various elements of the offence".

"There was, in truth, no case to answer," the judgment said.

"We recognise that the various summary-only offences with which the appellants were originally charged, if proved, might well not reflect the gravity of their actions.

"That, however, does not allow the use of an offence which aims at conduct of a different nature."

"All the appellants' convictions must be quashed," the judges added.