This week, Reclaim Finance will closely follow the appeal hearings in the case of twelve young climate advocates in Switzerland that Crédit Suisse has accused of violating property, following a protest involving a tennis game in their premises in Lausanne. Lucie Pinson, the founder of Reclaim Finance, was supposed to testify on behalf of the activists, but the court refused her testimony. A tennis match in Lausanne against $74 billion for fossil fuels – did the ref get it wrong?
A historic trial
Tuesday 22 and Thursday 24 September will see the nth set in the match between climate advocates and one of the world’s most polluting banks, Crédit Suisse. The bank accused the activists of trespassing on private property. On what grounds? A tennis match organised on the premises of Crédit Suisse in Lausanne to draw attention to the bank’s financing of fossil fuels and to ask Swiss tennis champion Roger Federer whether he was aware of and supported the actions of his sponsor.
At the end of the first trial, the activists had appealed against their convictions (CHF 21,600, just over €20,000 or $23,500, in fines), citing a state of necessity in the face of the climate emergency. The judge ruled in their favour, recognising that the “violation of private property” was made necessary by the climate emergency and that the activists had therefore acted legally. The day after the judgment, the public prosecutor of the canton of Vaud announced that he would appeal the decision.
This historic trial will continue this week, in a face-off between twelve young activists and a not-so-innocent bank. Lucie Pinson, the founder of Reclaim Finance, was supposed to testify on behalf of the activists, but her testimony was refused, so here it is in writing!
$74 billion for fossil fuels
Was there an error in judgement? On the docket, activists wanting to draw attention to the climate emergency versus the “victim,” Crédit Suisse, a financial giant that has supported fossil fuels to the tune of $74 billion between 2016 and 2019.
Crédit Suisse is one of the top 20 largest banks to support these dirty energies around the world and hinders the energy transition, which is more necessary than ever. Worse, Crédit Suisse is the fifth largest funder of big coal mining companies, offering $2.2 billion between 2016 and 2019, and the ninth largest funder of hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, for shale oil and gas providing over $11.9 billion in the same period.
It has also financed and invested in the worst climaticidal companies: those still planning to build new coal-fired power plants in the world! It has funded 13 of these companies to the tune of nearly $2.7 billion between 2017 and September 2019; it also held $581 million in shares and bonds in 63 such companies, according to the latest data for September 2019.
Among these companies are the worst global offenders in terms of climate, such as Adani, KEPCO (Korea Electric Power Corporation) or SPIC (State Power Investment Corporation), whose reputations are in tatters. The Indian company Adani is determined to open a new coal mining basin in north-eastern Australia at all costs, via the Carmichael project, which has become the most controversial fossil project in the world in recent years. Korea’s KEPCO and China’s SPIC are involved in many new coal-fired power plant projects across the globe, such as the Vung Ang 2 power plant in Vietnam.
A new fossil fuel policy… too little, too late
As a result of growing citizen pressure in recent months, Crédit Suisse finally made a move and announced a new fossil policy this summer, at the end of July. Unfortunately, this policy falls far short of what is needed to respond to the climate emergency, but it also falls far short of best practice in the sector. Indeed, the Swiss bank is one of the last to have decided to stop directly supporting new coal mining and power plant projects around the world, years after French banks, when it had much less activity in this sector.
Moreover, Crédit Suisse still has no criteria for excluding the coal developers, mentioned above, or the largest players in the sector. Nor is it committed to exiting the sector by deadlines aligned with the climate goals of the Paris Accord. This explains why it scored three 0s out of 5 criteria in the Coal Policy Tool, Reclaim Finance’s tool for rating the coal policies of international financial players, far behind Crédit Agricole or even BNP Paribas or Société Générale. Its pledge not to finance any fossil project in the Arctic region remains cosmetic given the low number of deals of this type.
In light of the aforementioned evidence, it is apparent that Crédit Suisse should be on trial for the crime of climaticide; not the 12 young climate activists bravely acting to draw attention to this ever-pressing issue.
To go further :