Two 17-year-old climate activists are alleging the Western Australian premier, Roger Cook, defamed them by falsely claiming during a press conference they intimidated and threatened the children of the chief executive and chair of petroleum giant Woodside Energy.
The two teenagers, Emma Heyink and Tom Power, are activists involved with campaign group Disrupt Burrup Hub and were involved in a protest at the Woodside annual general meeting at Crown Casino last Wednesday.
During the event, they and a third activist, who is not involved in the suit, stood to address Woodside’s chair, Richard Goyder, and CEO Meg O’Neill. They asked the executives to think of the potential harm that may be caused by expanding oil and gas production.
During their intervention, the two activists listed the executives’ children – all adults – by name when asking the executives to think about the consequences of their commercial activities on future generations, including their own families. The exchange was filmed and uploaded online.
Cook was asked about the incident at a press conference last Friday, where he stated that the activists had engaged in a “despicable act” and a “direct threat” towards the petroleum executives and their families.
On Tuesday the two activists issued a concerns notice to Cook’s offices through their lawyers, saying the premier made statements about them during the press conference that were “false, without basis and [constituting] serious defamation of our clients”.
“Our clients are conscientious young people yet to make a name for themselves in the world,” the notice said. “Their reputations have been seriously injured by their premier through statewide press before they have even had the chance to vote.”
The two activists are not currently seeking damages, according to the notice, but have asked for a written apology, a retraction and reimbursement of reasonable legal costs currently amounting to $1.
Power said Cook’s response to their protest left them “feeling intimidated by the WA premier threatening us with a police crackdown – which was a clear attempt to silence us on behalf of Woodside”.
Heyink said: “The only threat towards children is the danger Woodside’s Burrup Hub poses to future generations – including the children of Woodside employees, who are all adults now.”
The concerns notice argued that if the case were to end up before a court, it is possible it would be found that the defamation occurred in aggravated circumstances, meaning the premier could be liable for damages of more than $459,000.
The premier said in a statement: “I’ll always support people’s right to peaceful protest but it’s never OK to bring somebody’s kids into it – regardless of the cause. I’m not going to spend any more time responding to this.”
Michael Douglas, a consultant at Burgess Criminal Lawyers, the firm representing the two activists, said the 17-year-olds were “conscientious young people” who just wanted an apology.
“Our clients aren’t seeking any compensation at all,” he said. “And I think they could at law, but this isn’t a money-making exercise. They just want vindication, they want the premier to acknowledge that his comments were wrong and to say sorry.
“The fact they’re children means that the defamation was made in circumstances of aggravation. Apart from being legally significant, it’s also just not a nice thing to do to go after children without justification.
“Imagine if your kids had nasty, false things said about them by the premier of the state, how would you feel?”
Douglas said the campaigners could also pursue further claims, particularly against media organisations which repeated the premier’s comments without including their side of the story for balance, but they have yet to make that decision.
